Allowed

Marudhamalai Murugan Ind.P.L v. S.Arunachalam

Madras HC8 Jan 2018IP/20/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court adjudicated S. Arunachalam as insolvent upon finding he committed an act of insolvency by stating inability to pay a debt. The debtor's estate vested in the Official Assignee for creditors.

What did the court decide?

The debtor was adjudicated as insolvent; his estate vested with the Official Assignee for creditors; costs to be paid by the Official Assignee; 18 months granted for discharge application.

Marudhamalai Murugan Ind.P.L Vs S.Arunachalam — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 20.01.2018

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶6

Insolvency Petition No.20 of 2017

¶7

M/s. Marudhamalai Murugan Industries (P) Ltd.,
Represented by its Director,
Mrs.S.Saradha,
14/1 & 51 to 57, Ingur-638 058,
Perundurai (via), Erode District.
... Petitioning Creditor
Vs.
S.Arunachalam ... Debtor

¶8

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 9 to 13 of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909 and Order III of the Insolvency Rules, 1958 praying (i) to treat this Petition as urgent; (ii) to adjudicate the Respondent Debtor as an Insolvent; (iii) to direct that the estate of the Respondent Debtor be vested in the Official Assignee of Madras, for the benefit of the general body of Creditors of the Respondent Debtor; (iv) to order that the costs of this petition be paid by the Official Assignee of Madras, from and out of the estate of the Debtor to the Petitioning Creditor.

¶9

For Petitioning Creditor : Mr.Vignesh Venkat For Debtor : No appearance

¶10

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶11

¶12

J U D G M E N T

¶13

This Insolvency Petition is filed under Sections 9 to 13 of the

¶14

Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, to adjudicate the debtor as insolvent and to direct the estate of the debtor be vested in the Official Assignee for the benefit of the general body of creditor of the debtor.

¶15

2.The debtor has borrowed a sum of Rs.12,50,000/- from the

¶16

Petitioning Creditor as a short term loan on 26.10.2016. Despite several demands, the debtor has not repaid the money. On 06.07.2017, the debtor has written to the Petitioning Creditor stating that he is unable to clear the outstanding debt, and had requested the Petitioning Creditor to receive a sum of Rs.50,000/- in full quits of the liability. According to the Petitioning Creditor, the ultimatum letter dated 06.07.2017 itself amounts to an act of insolvency within the meaning of Section 9(1)(g) of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909.

¶17

3.Notice was ordered in this petition on 06.11.2017, the debtor

¶18

was served on 13.11.2017. Despite service, the debtor has not chosen to enter appearance. The Director of the Petitioning Creditor was examined as PW-1. She has filed proof affidavit and marked Exs.P-1 to P-7. From the oral and documentary evidence, it is seen that the

¶19

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶20

¶21

debtor has committed an act of insolvency within the meaning of Section 9(1)(g) of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909, rendering himself liable to be adjudicated as insolvent.

¶22

4.In view of the averments made in the Insolvency Petition,

¶23

evidence of PW-1 and the exhibits marked. I am of the view that the debtor has committed an Act of Insolvency and therefore, he is liable to be adjudicated as insolvent.

¶24

5.The Debtor is adjudicated as Insolvent. The estate of the debtor shall vest with the Official Assignee for the benefit of the general body of Creditors of the debtor. The costs of this petition shall be paid by the Official Assignee from and out of the estate of the debtor to the

¶25

Creditor. The insolvent is granted 18 months time to apply for discharge.

¶26

08.01.2018

¶27

¶28

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶29

¶30

R.SUBRAMANIAN,. J.

¶31

¶32

Insolvency Petition No.20 of 2017
08.01.2018

¶33

http://www.judis.nic.in

Marudhamalai Murugan Ind.P.L v. S.Arunachalam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Marudhamalai Murugan Ind.P.L v. S.Arunachalam

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

Smt.K.Vidhya Vs Mrs.K.Sumithra

Tmt .Mala Devarajan Vs M.Jagannathan

K.Ravi Vs Mrs. K.Indiraniammal

C.Heeralal Joshi Vs Praveen Kumar Pukhraj

Mrs.N.J.Mehra(Deceased) Vs K.Sivakumar

Mr.P.Munuswamy Vs G.Vijayalakshmi