Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

In Re: H.R. Cobbold

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Nov 23, 1908
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/856611

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kolkata
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Civil

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Insolvency - Indian Insolvent Act (11 and 12 Vict., Clause 21), Section 73--Practice--Appeal by petition--Petition by creditor not included in schedule--Jurisdiction of High Court in its Appellate Jurisdiction--Distribution of Dividends. -

Key legal issue
Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: H.R. Cobbold

Legal References

Reported In
(1909)ILR36Cal512,2Ind.Cas.572a

Excerpt

insolvency - indian insolvent act (11 and 12 vict., clause 21), section 73--practice--appeal by petition--petition by creditor not included in schedule--jurisdiction of high court in its appellate jurisdiction--distribution of dividends. - frances w. maclean, c.j.1. this really is not an appeal from a decision of mr. justice fletcher, for he passed no order in the matter. it is an application under section 73 of the insolvent act and we have ample jurisdiction to make the order which we propose to do. the official assignee has not appeared before us but the insolvent has and he does not object to the order.2. it is quite clear from the correspondence and the evidence in the case that the present appellants considered that they ought to have been entered in the schedule of the creditors in respect of the amount they claimed and those who represented the official assignee took the same view, and in fact a petition was presented for amending the schedule in that respect. it appears, however, that the application for the final discharge of the insolvent came on, on the 3rd of march in this year and apparently the matter escaped the attention of the parties and of the court and nothing was done in the matter. the creditors, the present appellants, now come and ask us to intervene under section 73 of the insolvent act. we think justice demands that that should be done, and, the appellants not desiring to cancel the order of discharge, and we think properly, an order should be made in terms of prayers 2 and 3 of their petition.3. the costs of both parties may be paid out of the estate in the hands of the official assignee.harington and brett, jj.4. concurred.

Full Judgment

Frances W. Maclean, C.J.

1. This really is not an appeal from a decision of Mr. Justice Fletcher, for he passed no order in the matter. It is an application under Section 73 of the Insolvent Act and we have ample jurisdiction to make the order which we propose to do. The Official Assignee has not appeared before us but the insolvent has and he does not object to the order.

2. It is quite clear from the correspondence and the evidence in the case that the present appellants considered that they ought to have been entered in the schedule of the creditors in respect of the amount they claimed and those who represented the Official Assignee took the same view, and in fact a petition was presented for amending the schedule in that respect. It appears, however, that the application for the final discharge of the insolvent came on, on the 3rd of March in this year and apparently the matter escaped the attention of the parties and of the Court and nothing was done in the matter. The creditors, the present appellants, now come and ask us to intervene under Section 73 of the Insolvent Act. We think justice demands that that should be done, and, the appellants not desiring to cancel the order of discharge, and we think properly, an order should be made in terms of prayers 2 and 3 of their petition.

3. The costs of both parties may be paid out of the estate in the hands of the Official Assignee.

Harington and Brett, JJ.

4. Concurred.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial