LexTUKARAM RAMCHANDRA MANE (DEAD) BY LRS. versus RAJARAM BAPU LAKULE (DEAD) BY LRS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A TUKARAM RAMCHANDRA MANE (DEAD) BY LRS. B c v. RAJARAM BAPU LAKULE (DEAD) BY LRS. APRIL 16, 1998 [K. VENKATASWAMI AND A.P. MISRA, JJ.] Insolvency : Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920: Section 37(1). Adjudication of debtor as insolvent-Annulment-Effect of-Debtor, being owner of suit property, transferred to creditor by deed of mortgage by conditional sale of a certain sum-Subsequently, the debtor executed regular sale deed in favour of the creditor for an additional amount-Insolvency Court adjudicated the debtor as an insolvent and appointed official receiver D in respect of the property-later, the Insolvency Court, on evidence, held the regular sale deed to be null and void-Appellate court confirmed the decision-Ultimately, Insolvency Court annulled the adjudication-Held : The expression "all acts" 1n S.37(1) covered orders of the Court or receiver including adjudication of title dispute-Therefore, the High Court rightly E upheld the view of the authorised officer under Debt Relief Act that notwisthstanding the annulment of adjudication by the Insolvency Court its earlier order declaring the regular sale deed as null and void remained effective and that consequently the conditional sale stood revived and the debtor's relationship with the creditor existed entitling the debtor relief under the Debt Relief Act-Maharashtra Debt Relief Act, 1975. F Words and Phrases : "All acts "-Meaning of-In the context of S. 37(1) of the Provincial Insolvency Act, !920. G The respondent-debtor was the original owner of the suit property. By a deed of mortgage by conditional sale, the respondent transferred the said property in favour of the appellant-creditor for a certain sum. Subsequently, the respondent executed a regular sale deed in favour of the appellant after .,__ receiving an additional amount. The Insolvency Court adjudicated the ~espondent as an insolvent and appointed an official receiver in respect of H the said property. Later, the Insolvency Court, on evidence, held the regular 784 ._ -( ~ ..... _,,.. T.R. MANE v. R.B. LAKULE 785 sale deed to he nuil and void. The a11pellate court confirmed the decision. A Ultimately, the Insolvency Court annulled the ad.indication. Thereafter; the rcs11ondent moYed the authority under the Maharashtra Debt Relief Act, 1975 for a declaration that the debt, which was the suh.iect matter of the mortgage stood extinguished as the respondent, was a debtor B within the meaning of the Act. The appellant contended that in view of the order of annulment and in the light of Section 37(1) of the Provincial lnsolyency Act, 1920 the sale deed in his favour ~1ood re\ived and, therefore, there was no relationship of dehtor and creditor to move the application under the Debt Relief Act. The authorised officer held that the earlier declaration by the Insolvency c Cou11 and by the appellate comi that the regular sale deed was null and void remained effective and, therefore, the conditional sale stood revived and the debtor's relationship with the creditor existed. Accordingly, the application was allowed with the result that the debt stood wi11ed our. D The a1111ellant filed a w1it (letition before the High Court challenging the aforesaid decision on the ground that the words "all acts therefore" occurring in Section 37(1) of the Act would not included the judicial orders passed by the Court declaring the re::,'lllar sale deed as null and void. The High Court rejected this contention and dismissed the petition. Hence this E appeal. Dismissing the appeal, this Court HELD: 1. A plain reading of St.'Ction 37(1) of the Prmincial Insolvency Act, 1920 would show that he orders passed by the court or receiver including F adjudication of title dispute would come within the pun<iew of "all acts" occurring in that Section. Therefore, the High Court rightly upheld the view of the authorised officer under the Maharashtra Debt Relife Act, 1975 notwithstanding the annulment order passed by the Insolvency Court annulling its earlier order declaring the regular sale deed as null and void G remained effective and that consequently the conditional sale deed re\·ived and th debtor's relationship with the creditor existed with the rc~1llt that the respondent-debtor was entitled to relife under the Debt Relief Act. [789-G) .frora Enterprises Ltd. v. !nduhhusan Obhan, [1997) 5 SCC 366, relied OIL H 786 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1998] 2 S.C.R.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.