FREDERICK PEACOCK Vs. MADAN GOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question referred to us is whether a vesting order made under the Insolvency Act (11 and 12 Vict. Clause 21) has or has not the effect of giving the Official Assignee priority over the claim of a judgment-creditor in respect of property attached at the latter's instance previous to the passing of such order.

(2.) I am not sure that the question would not have been better framed, if it had been "whether a judgment-creditor has priority over the Official Assignee in respect of property attached by him previous to the passing of the vesting order," but the distinction is not of much importance.

(3.) The reference has arisen from a difference of opinion in the case of J. B. Miller v. Lukhlmani Debi (1901) I. L. R, 28 Calc. 419, on the one hand, and of Soobul Chunder Law v. Bussik Latt Miller (1888) I. L. R. 15 Calc. 202, on the other.