K MADAN KUMAR Vs. RAJASEKHAR GOUDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in I.C. No. 21/2011 on the file of the II Addl. District Judge, Bellary, which came to be dismissed in limine as per its order dated 14.10.2011 have presented this appeal u/s 75(2) of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920, (for short 'the Act') interalia urging that their petition filed u/ss.10, 11 and 13 of the Act could not have been dismissed at the threshold without adjudging petitioners as insolvent or without going into the further merits of the petition when the petition was a debtor's petition presented u/s 10 of the Act and therefore required adjudication after issue of notice to the respondent-creditors. The learned Judge of the Insolvency Court not only dismissed the main petition of the two debtors, but also dismissed IA-II filed u/s 74(1) of the Act so also IA-IU filed u/s 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking for protection to the petitioners/appellants from the onslaughts and harassment by the respondents/creditors in view of their coercive proceedings and pressurising tactics on the appellants to pay off the amounts the appellants owe to them though the appellants were bankrupt and were unable to pay the debts.

(2.) The petition presented before the Insolvency Court indicated not less than 72 persons as respondents and except for four respondents namely respondent Nos. 53, 58 and 60 who were private organisations and not individuals and respondent Nos. 68, the Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited represented by its General Manager, the rest of the respondents to the petition are all individuals but the petitioners had not indicated the names of their father even in case of a single individual arrayed as respondent/creditors to the petitions.

(3.) This defect and the casual and careless manner of presentation of the insolvency petition coupled with the fact that many of the respondent/creditors were from outside the State of Karnataka whose addresses and whereabouts and identification had not even been properly furnished except for describing that the father's name of such respondents were not known to the petitioners, compelled the learned Judge of the Insolvency Court to frame a point as to the maintainability of the insolvency petition presented u/ss.10, 11 and 13 of the Act along with the applications as already noticed and having examined this question in detail and having answered this point in the negative and against the petitioners, the Insolvency Petition having been dismissed by the learned Judge of the trial Court, the present appeal by the very petitioners u/s 75(2) of the Act.