CHINNADURAI Vs. KARUPPANNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order of dismissal of the Interim Application in IA.No.49/10 in IP.No.44/05 dated 26.08.2011. As the CRP is filed under the Art. 227 of Constitution of India, this court by using the power of superintendence, subjects the grounds raised in the CRP for analysis.

(2.) The present petition is filed based on the question of fact. However, the supervisory Jurisdiction conferred on the High Courts under the Art. 227 of Constitution is confined only to see whether an Inferior Court or Tribunal has proceeded within its parameters and not to correct an error apparent on the face of the record much less of an error of Law. It is also not permissible to a High court on a petition filed under Art. 227 of Constitution to review or re-weigh the evidence upon which the inferior court purports to have passed the order or to correct errors of law in the decision. Before go into the merits of the case, this court keeps in mind that the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court as reported in 2003 (3 SCC 524).

(3.) It is the Case on hand that the revision petitioner is the 16th Respondent/Creditor and he filed an application U/s 21(3) (ii) of the Provincial Insolvency Act and Sec 151 of Civil Procedure Code to issue warrant of arrest on the debtor and keep him in prison till the disposal of Insolvency petition for the reason that the Respondent/Debtor did not include all his properties in the insolvency petition. When the affidavit filed by the revision petitioner before the learned Trial Court is perused, this court noticed that he has stated in Para No.7 "that there are 2 more items of property that the debtor had knowingly omitted to include in the insolvency petition with fraudulent intention and to conceal his property". For the petition filed U/s. 21(3)(ii) the debtor/petitioner filed his counter and refuted the averments of affidavit of the Revision Petitioner. After analysed the merits of the petition and the courter statement, the learned Trial Court dismissed the petition as there is no merit in the same.