MAUNG BA THAW Vs. MA PIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is Receiver of the estate of Po Thit and Ma Nyein E, his wife, who were adjudicated insolvents on 11 January 1929, and he appeals from a decree of the High Court of Judicature of Rangoon, dated 18 January 1932, which reversed the order of the District Court of Henzada, dated 30 March 1931 and directed that the respondent be added in the Schedule of Debts as a creditor of the estate in respect of certain sums, amounting in all to Rs. 18,691-9-0, claimed in respect of eight promissory notes. The respondent had also claimed in respect of a mortgage debt of Rs. 4,000, but it is now admitted that it had been satisfied.

(2.) Prior to the application by the respondent to be added in the Schedule of Debts, which was filed on 30 January 1931, and out of which the present appeal arises, the appellant had made an application under S. 54, Provincial Insolvency Act, dated 6 April 1929, against the present respondent, asking that the payment by the insolvents to her of a sum of Rs. 19,000 within three months of the petition for adjudication should be declared fraudulent and void and that the present respondent should be ordered to pay the amount to him. After an inquiry, the District Court annulled the payment, which had been made on 24 September 1928, and in fact amounted to Rs. 18,618-1-6, and directed the respondent to pay that amount to the appellant. The respondent appealed to the High Court, but her appeal was dismissed, and an application for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council was also unsuccessful. The respondent then filed the present application.

(3.) In these earlier proceedings the respondent admitted that the payment had been made to her, but she claimed that it was paid as the price of paddy which was stored in her godown and on which she claimed to have had a lien for debts due to her by the insolvent Po Thit. In support of that claim of indebtedness she produced loose counterfoils of the eight promissory notes and the mortgage for Rs. 4,000, representing the same claim of indebtedness in respect of which the present application is made by her. In the course of the inquiry in these earlier proceedings the present respondent gave evidence in support of her claim and her evidence was supported by that of the insolvent Po Thit. In her evidence the respondent admitted that the mortgage debt of Rs. 4,000 had already been satisfied. In the present application the advocates for both parties agreed that the evidence in the earlier proceedings should be evidence in the case, and that they would produce no further evidence.