DUKHIT PANDE Vs. TIKHIDEO OJHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is on behalf of the insolvent, arising out of a proceeding in insolvency. The appellant was adjudged insolvent on his own application on 15-5-1954. In his application for being adjudged insolvent, one of the two properties which were mentioned was khata No. 310, village. Shahpur. Pergana Bihea, district Shahabad. On 15-7-1954, one of the creditors mentioned in the application for Insolvency, namely, Rikhideo Ojha, filed an application to the effect that he has come to know that properties, a list of which was appended to the application, belonged to the insolvent and that he was prepared to buy those properties in satisfaction of his own debts. That application of. the creditor disclosed that including khata No. 310 of village Shahpur already mentioned in the petition of insolvency, the insolvent had 8.82 acres of land. This petition of the creditor was opposed by the insolvent, on the ground that some of those properties belonged to the insolvent's cosharer and the rest of the properties mentioned in the list had been sold long long ago and were in possession of respective vendees, and the prayer of the insolvent made was that the petition of the creditor for selling the properties as the properties of the insolvent should be rejected. The Court considered this matter, and, after hearing the parties it passed the following order:

(2.) Purnendu Narain, appearing on behalf of the appellant, has said all that could be said in support of the appeal. He submits that the order is wrong because no inquiry was made by the Court below before passing the order and that, therefore, the order should be set aside.

(3.) Mr. Sambhunath has raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the appeal. He says that under Section 75 an appeal is permitted by law by 'a person aggrieved' and that the insolvent, in the circumstances, of this case, cannot be said to be aggrieved at all. The insolvent's case is that the properties disclosed in the application of the creditor either belonged to his cosharer or have been sold already long long time ago. If that be the case, it is beyond comprehension how this insolvent is aggrieved by an order selling properties which, according to the insolvent, do not belong to him. Apart from this it appears quite clear from the authorities that after the order of adjudication, the insolvent -has no right to appeal because the estate of the insolvent vests in the receiver appointed by the Court in the insolvency proceeding. In the Full Bench case of the Madras High Court in -- 'S. Hari Rao v. Official Assignee High Court, Madras,' AIR 1926 Mad 556 (A), it was laid down that