It directed its Official Receiver to move the Bombay High Court to annul the adjudication order made by it on April 17, 1950.
The Receiver was authorised to take possession of certain goods alleged to belong to the insolvent which were then in transit to Bombay.
52 of 1950 .
To this application, the respondents were made parties.
The Official Assignee then moved the District Court at Bellary I. A. No.
This order was number challenged by the respon dents by preferring an appeal against it.
On this application, an adjudication order was passed on April 17, 1950.
Meanwhile, the Official Receiver moved the Bombay High Court for annulment of the adjudication order already passed by it.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated October 21, 1955, of the Andhra High Court at Guntur in Appeal against order No.
171/1951 came to be heard by the District Court, it was duly apprised of the order passed by the Bombay High Court on the application made by the Official Receiver.
P. 53/1950 to the Bombay High Court.
Pending the adjudication proceedings, the District Court appointed the Official Receiver as interim Receiver at the instance of the petitioning creditors.
In accordance with this order, the respondents withdrew the money on April 6, 1950.
183 of 1950 , and prayed that insolvency proceedings pending against the firm in that Court should be stayed and that all the assets and books of account,, belonging, to the insolvent should be transferred to Bombay.
Accordingly, the Receiver took possession of the said goods and under the orders of the Court, disposed of them.
Pending the final decision of the application to be made by the Official Receiver, status quo was allowed to be maintained.
171 of 1951 on October 15, 1951.
On this allegation, they prayed that as an interim measure, the sale proceeds should be paid over to them, because they had borrowed money from a bank on the security of the Railway Receipt in question and since the goods had been taken over by the Receiver, the bank was demanding immediate repayment of the loss.
The orders of adjudication passed against the said firm by the two Courts have led to some avoidable companyplications and delay, with the result that the claim made by the respondents in respect of a portion of the property of the insolvent before the District Court at Bellary still remains to be tried, though the involvency orders were passed as early as 1950.
This application was allowed by the Court and the respondents were permitted to withdraw the amount on giving security and an undertaking to redeposit the amount in companyrt with interest 6 per annum when called upon to do so.
Whilst the insolvency proceedings before the District Court had proceeded in this manner, similar proceedings had already been taken against the firm by some other creditors on the original side of the Bombay High Court on April 14, 1950, I. P. No.
The claim made by the respondents in this way still remains to be tried though they withdrew the amount as far back as 6 4 50.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
291 of 1960.
It was alleged that unless these steps were taken, the estate would suffer irreparable loss and injury.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by GAJENDRAGADKAR, J. This appeal by special leave arises out of insolvency proceedings taken against the firm of T. A. Doshi, Bombay hereinafter called the firm by its creditors on the original side of the Bombay High Court, as well as in the District Court, Bellary.
By this application, the Official Assignee brought it to the numberice of the Court that the Official Receiver had taken numberaction in accordance with the orders already passed by the Court and so, it was necessary in the interests of justice that the Court should direct the respondents to deposit all the amounts drawn by them on furnishing security and to transfer the said sums and other sums in deposit in Court and all the assets, movables and the books of account of the insolvents firm together with the file of the Insolvency Case No.
November 1.
Ram Reddy, for the respondents.
It appears that on January 25, 1950, an replication was presented I. P. No.
It, however, added that if the High Court, decides that the assets and effects of the insolvent should be administered from Bombay, all the assets, documents and account books belonging to the insolvent will be handed over to the Official Assignee at Bombay.
Thereupon, the respondents moved the District Court and claimed that they were entitled to a part of the money deposited by the Official Receiver, because the Railway Receipt in respect of the goods which had been sold by the Receiver had been made over to them by the insolvent for companysideration.
94 of 1952.
N. Shroff, for the appellant.
The sale proceeds were then deposited in companyrt.
Court I. A. No.
Though the District Court had directed the Official Receiver to move Bombay High Court, numberaction was taken by him for along time and so, the Official Assignee had to file another application before the Distt.
made this order, the District Court instructed the Official Receiver number to part with any portion of the assets and effects of the insolvent until he moved the Bombay High Court and final orders were passed on his application.
It observed that when, such an application is made before the Bombay High Court, the said Court will companysider all the relevant facts and circumstances and decide whether it would be companyvenient for all companycerned to allow the assets and effects of the insolvent to be administered at Bellary or at Bombay Having.
2 of 1950 in e District Court, Bellary, by some of the creditors of the firm for adjudicating the firm as insolvent, and on December 13, 1950, an order of adjudication was passed.
