Allowed

,R. Arvind M. Makavana v. Jitesh Pranlal Sheth

Bombay HC6 Mar 2012INPT/16/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte insolvent petition, the applicant sought adjudication against the debtor who suspended payment. Relying on a dishonoured cheque and a suspension letter as an act of insolvency under s. 9 of the Presidency-towns Insolvency Act, 1909, the court allowed the petition and disposed of it with costs.

What did the court decide?

Order of adjudication against the debtor as insolvent passed with costs.

,R. Arvind M. Makavana Vs Jitesh Pranlal Sheth — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN INSOLVENCY PETITION NO. 16 OF 2011

¶2

Re : Mr. Jitesh Pranlal Sheth

¶3

…. A Debtor.

¶4

Ex-parte : Arvind M. Makavana …. Petitioning Creditor.

¶5

Mr. Mateen Shaikh for Petitioning Creditor.

¶6

Debtor absent (though served).

¶7

CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA, J.

¶8

DATE : MARCH 6, 2012.

¶9

P.C. :-

¶10

By this Petition, the Petitioning creditor has prayed that an order of adjudication be passed against the debtor. According to the Petitioner, the debtor is justly and truly indebted to the petitioning creditor in the sum of Rs.50,000/- due and payable under the Promissory Note dated 10^th February 2011 (being Exhibit A to the Petition). Debtor has issued the cheque of Rs.50,000/- to the Petitioning Creditor, which was dishonoured. The Petitioning Creditor has called upon the Debtor to pay the amount due and payable. In reply thereto, by his letter dated 18^th April 2011, the Debtor has expressed his inability to pay the amount and further stated that he has suspended payment to all his creditors. (Exhibit – E to the Petition).

¶11

The Petitioning Creditor therefore submitted that the said letter dated 18^th April 2011 suspending payment to all creditors constitutes as an act of insolvency as per section 9 of the Presidency-towns Insolvency Act, 1909 and thus Debtor above named has committed an act of insolvency on 18^th April 2011. In view of above, it is submitted that Petitioning Creditor is entitled to file present Petition for an order adjudicating the debtor above named as an Insolvent.

¶12

The above Petition has been personally served upon the debtor above named on 1^st March 2011 and affidavit proving service thereof is filed.

¶13

Debtor has not filed any affidavit in reply. Debtor is absent. Hence, the statements/ allegations made in the petition have remained un-controverted.

¶14

The Petition, is therefore, allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) with costs. The Petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶15

S.J. KATHAWALLA, J.

,R. Arvind M. Makavana v. Jitesh Pranlal Sheth

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

,R. Arvind M. Makavana v. Jitesh Pranlal Sheth

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Rajiv Narhari Sardesai and Two Ors. Vs Dynamech Cranes Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

A/S Dan-Bunkering Ltd. Vs M.V. Icdas 11

Skm Alloys Private Limited Vs ----------------------

Dinesh D. Jain. Vs Vishnukant Dhanraj Maheshwari @ Vishnukant Dhanraj Rathi

Ecokrin Hygiene Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ecolab Foods Safety and Hygiene Solutions Pvt. Ltd. and 2 Ors.

Cinemax India Limited Vs