MOHAMMAD YUSUF KHAN Vs. NOOR MOHAMMAD KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against an order rejecting an application for review filed by the appellant in the following circumstances.

(2.) It appears that the appellant was adjudged an insolvent on the 16th January, 1969, and, the respondent, one of his creditors, thereafter, made an application on the 21st February, 1969, to be entered in the Schedule of creditors. Notice thereof was issued to the appellant. Being unsuccessful in getting it served on him, the creditor applied for issue of notice to his lawyer and this prayer was allowed by an order dated the 13th September, 1969. It was served and the service report was received on the 16th January, 1970. The creditor then filed an application on the 14th March. 1970, for fixing instalments at the rate of Rs. 300/- to be realised' from the salary of the insolvent. This matter also was ordered to be heard along with the debt-proof. It appears that in spite of the case having been fixed up on different dates for the purposes aforesaid, there was no appearance on behalf of the insolvent-appellant. It was only on the 23rd July. 1970, that his lawyer filed hazri. The disposal of the debt-proof matter was then fixed for the 13th August, 1970. It appears, however, that for some reason not known the records were not put up before the District Judge on that date and the matter was taken up on the next day, that is, the 14th August, 1970. On that date, the creditor proved the debt and the District Judge passed an order for his name being entered into the schedule under Section 33, Provincial Insolvency Act (hereinafter called 'the Actp. On the next date, that is, on the 30th April, 1971, the matter of fixation of instalment could not be taken up, the Presiding Officer being away on circuit court. It was postponed to the 26th May, 1971. Meanwhile, however, on the 12th of May, 1971, the appellant appeared and filed a petition praying for a review of the order passed on the 14th of August, 1970. This application was heard on the 26th September, 1972, and rejected. The present appeal is directed against the said order.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the respondent has raised a preliminary objection that the appeal is not maintainable in view of Order 47, Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'). It is quite obvious from a reading of the aforesaid rule that an order of the Court rejecting an application for review shall not be appealable in view of Order 47, Rule 7 (1), although the order granting such an application may be objected to on the grounds mentioned therein. It may be mentioned that an order under Section 33 of the Act is appealable under Section 75 (2) of the Act. The appellant did not come up to this Court against the order aforesaid. Learned Counsel for the appellant has not contested this proposition of law. Accordingly, the appeal must be held to be not maintainable.