DIRISENA VENKATA JANAKAMMA Vs. DIRISENA VENKATESWARA LIAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Petition arises out of an application; filed by the 1st Respondent herein to adjudicate him as an insolvent on the ground that he was unable to pay his debts which amounted to Rs. 2799 -3 -0. In B schedule attached to the petition, he disclosed that he had only assets of the value of Rs. 8/ -. The creditors are mainly his 1st wife and daughter who obtained decrees against him. The 3rd creditor shown in A Schedule of Creditors is the State of Madras to whom a sum of Rs. 398 -7 -0 is due by way of court -fee.

(2.) THE District Munsif of Vijayawada dismissed the application on the ground that it was not a bona fide application, but was made with the ulterior motive of evading the maintenance of Respondents 1 and 2 and the debt due to the Government. On appeal, the District Judge of Masulipatam set aside the order of the Distant Munsif and adjudicated him an insolvent. The Civil Revision Petition is filed by the wife and daughter challenging the correctness of the Order of the District Judge.

(3.) THE learned Advocate for the Petitioner contended that the application should be dismissed on the ground that the debtor did not disclose the salary he was earning. There is no provision in the Provincial Insolvency Act directing that he should so disclose his salary or possession of any assets.