1919 (5) TMI 2

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to be the true amount of his debt, namely, some Rs. 6,000 odd. It was stated originally at about that amount by the debtor. In 1913, the creditor himself, who ought to know better than anybody else, stated the amount at Rs. 3,418 odd and supported that claim by affidavit, at which amount it was allowed. He now says that it was a mistake. 2. No doubt the Insolvency Court has the same jurisdiction t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n the creditor's application that the amount of the debt should be entered as Rs. 3,418 odd, the amount which appeared to the Court to be correct according to the creditor's sworn statement. That decision or order may have been right, or may have been wrong. We are not now considering the merits. It was clearly subject to appeal if it was wrong. An application was made to review it. That a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on 24 of the Insolvency Act is concerned, the Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the matter at all. It had already decided it once and was functus officio. Under that section the application was properly rejected. 3. Section 152 seems to have been called into play upon the suggestion that the original error was a clerical error which required amendment. That, however, in the first place begs t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X