B PADMAVATHI Vs. CHINNAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondents 1 and 2 filed a petition in I. P. No. 19 of 1983 on the file of Sub Court , udumalpet, to adjudicate the 3rd respondent as insolvent. According to them, the 3rd respondent herein has executed a promissory note on 22. 3. 81 in favour of the respondents 1 and 2 for a sum of Rs. 14,000 and a notice was issued on 26. 9. 81 demanding the 3rd respondent to pay the said amount. On 15. 7. 83 the 3rd respondent herein has executed a sale deed in favour of the appellant herein. According to the respondents 1 and 2, such an alienation was only with a view to defraud the creditor with fraudulent intention and saving the property for himself without meeting the obligations to the creditors. On that basis, they have stated that the 3rd respondent herein had committed an act of insolvency.

(2.) THE appellant herein filed a counter objecting to the averments in the petition stating that the property originally was settled in favour of the minor children under Ex. Bl dated 8. 10. 79. THE property was sold under Ex. A3 dated 15. 7. 83 in their favour for himself and minor sons it cannot be said that it amounts to an act of insolvency.

(3.) IN view of the above, I do not find any substantial question of law to be decided in this case. I do not find any merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed accordingly. No costs. .