Insolvency
Insolvency legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Obligation to pay maintenance to wife and children enforced by decree of Family Court, not to be regarded as "debt" owed
Scope
Petitioner, against whom decree of Family Court for maintenance payable to wife was being executed, sought to invoke provisions of the Insolvency (Karachi Division) Act, 1909 to adjudicate himself as "insolvent", on ground that petitioner had no means to discharge his liabilities
Validity
When Family Court awarded maintenance to wife, it did not enforce payment of any debt, as such maintenance did not arise from any contract (express or implied) but from relationship of marriage, and said maintenance was not in payment of debt but performance of duty of husband to support his wife measured by decree of Family Court
Such husband or father could not obtain discharge of his liability under a decree of maintenance by resort to insolvency
Object of insolvency law could not be to deprive wife / children of support and maintenance due from husband/father
High Court observed that Court could not presume that intention of Legislature was to make law of insolvency as means of avoiding enforcement of moral and legal obligation devolved upon husband / father for maintenance of his wife and children
Something which was not a "debt" did not become a "debt" when such obligation was enforced by decree or order of Court and decree for maintenance was therefore not a "debt" within meaning of Insolvency (Karachi Division) Act, 1909 and could not form basis of adjudication of the petitioner as "insolvent"
Petition, being not maintainable, was dismissed, in circumstances.
Neither respondent/Bank ever presented any insolvency petition before competent court as required under S. 7 of Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 nor the petitioner was adjudged as "undischarged insolvent" by a court of competent jurisdiction, therefore, Authority was not justified in rejecting nomination papers of petitioner for local government elections on such account.
Allowed where debtor had kept no accounts of such 2 years-(Sind) Chief Court Rules, r. 620 (3).
Insolvency-Deed of composition-Alteration of by way of allowing compound interest instead of simple, to benefit one creditor
Approval of insolvency Court not obtained-Civil suit by such creditor on basis of alteration barred-Insolvency Court only to deal with matter.
"Insolvency", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/22216
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Insolvency"
P L D 2021 Supreme Court 913
Mrs. SAMINA MEHR-UN-NISA MAZARI — Appellant Versus PUBLIC AT LARGE and others — Respondents
Court: High Court2021 C L D 1217
Mrs. SAMINA MEHR-UN-NISA MAZARI — Appellant Versus PUBLIC AT LARGE and others — Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of PakistanP L D 1978 Karachi 376
ASPI GUSTADJI DINSHAW‑Insolvent Versus HABIB BANK LTD.‑Arbitrator
Court: ‑‑‑ S. 25.‑Protection order‑Grant of protection order without first there being public examination of insolvent‑Not prohibited by any provision of S. 25 and permissible.‑Protection order.2016 M L D 846
LIAQAT ALI and others — Petitioners Versus RETURNING OFFICER and others — Respondents
Court: LahoreP L D 1962 (W
GHULAM KHAWAJA AND OTHERS‑Appellants Versus Khan MUHAMMAD ALLAH DAD KHAN — Respondent
Court:P L D 1978 Karachi 375
MESSRS BRITISH INDIA ENGINEERING WORKS, KARACHI‑Plaintiff Versus MESSRS GLOBE NAVIGATION LTD. AND 2 OTHERS-Defendants
Court:P L D 1976 Karachi 859
MESSRS PAKISTAN PRODUCTS LTD., KARACHI Creditors‑Petitioners Versus MESSRS YOUSUF ABDUL AZIZ & SONS AND 6 OTHERS Respondents
Court:P L D 1953 Sind 12
In the matter of NUSSERWANJI CAWASJI WADIA‑Insolvent Versus MRS. FRENNY N. WADIA‑Creditor
Court: High CourtP L D 1966 (W
M. IMAMUDDIN‑Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD YUSUF AND ANOTHER‑Respondents
Court: It is imperative under the provisions of section 13 of the Insolvency (the Karachi Division and Dacca) Act old Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909 that the debt alleged by the petition ing creditor shall be proved and that the alleged act or acts of insolvency on the part of the debtor or at least one of them should also be established. If the Court is not satisfied on both the above requisites it shall dismiss the petition; alternatively, if the Court is satisfied on the above two points and the debtor does not appear despite the notice issued to him, the Court may make an order of adjudication as prayed for. But the provision of subsection (6) of section 13 of the Act makes it perfectly clear that where the debtor appears in answer to the petition and denies his indebtedness the Court on taking security from him in respect of the amount of the debt as may ultimately be found and of the costs in' establishing it may either dismiss the petition or otherwise stay all proceedings thereon after taking the requisite security to try the question relating to the debt. In a fit case where the question involved in the matter requires elaborate inquiry likely to take a long time the In solvency Judge should after taking sufficient security from the debtor stay all proceedings on the petition for such length of time as may be necessary for the creditor to prove his debt against debtor in due course of law before the ordinary Civil Courts.