Allowed

Suraj Prakash Khemchand v. Avinash B. Jaising and Anr.

Bombay HC17 Mar 2009NMIS/21/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed an insolvent's petition for permission to travel to Australia for a consultancy assignment. The court accepted undertakings regarding return dates, passport surrender, and deposit of earnings, finding no evidence of bogus intent.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to travel to Australia for consultancy, subject to return by May 31, 2009, passport surrender, and deposit of 15% earnings.

Suraj Prakash Khemchand Vs Avinash B. Jaising and Anr. — Banking and Recovery | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶2

 VP H

¶3

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

NOTICE OF MOTION No. 21 OF 2009
IN
INSOLVENCY PETITION No.82 OF 2002

¶5

Suraj Prakash Khemchand...Petitioner

¶6

Vs

¶7

Avinash B. Jaising & Anr....Respondents

¶8

Mr. K. T. Kukrja, for the petitioner/crditor.
Mr. Niranjan Jagtap for the Insolvents.

¶9

Mr. A. P. Kothari, Dy. Official Assignee

¶10

CORAM: S. J. VAZIFDAR, J.

¶11

DATED: MARCH 17, 2009.

¶12

P.C.:

¶13

.This Notice of Motion is taken out by
Insolvent No.1, who had been adjudicated an insolvent
by an order dated 6th November 2003, seeking
permission of this Court to accept a Consultancy
Assignment offered by Danddeli Ferro Pvt. Ltd. The
assignment involves Insolvent No.1 traveling to
Australia.

¶14

2.The Insolvent undertakes to this Court to
return to India, latest by 31st May 2009, not to apply
for citizenship or residency in any other country and
to surrender the passport on his return to the
Official Assignee, lastest by 10th June, 2009. The

¶15

- 2 -

¶16

undertakings are accepted.

¶17

3.Further the insolvent shall upon receipt of
the amounts from the said Company, deposit 15% thereof
with the Official Assignee. Insolvent No.1 shall
submit to the Official Assignee proof of the amount
received from the Company within 4 weeks from the
receipt thereof.

¶18

4.There is nothing on record which creates any
doubt about the intentions of Insolvent No.1, nor is
there anything on record to suggest that the
assignment is bogus.

¶19

5.Subject to the above, the Notice of Motion is
made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b) and
(c). It is clarified that this order shall operate
only to enable insolvent No. 1 to travel upto 31st
May 2009. By 31st May 2009 he shall return to India.
Leave to apply for prayer (e) by a fresh Notice of
Motion.

¶20

.Notice of Motion is accordingly disposed of.

Suraj Prakash Khemchand v. Avinash B. Jaising and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Prakash Khemchand v. Avinash B. Jaising and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vandana Arvind Diwadkar Vs Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corpn. Ltd. and Another

Saurashtra Cement Ltd. Vs State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Vandana Arvind Diwadkar Vs Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corpn. Ltd. and Another

Shri Chhaganlal Haribhai Kesur, Vs M/S. Anu International Marketing Services and Anr.

Jaswantlal Manilal Shah. Vs Jugalkishore Dwarkadas Seksaria (Deceased)

Asalraj P. Jain Vs Laxman Shivaramshetty and Anr.