AIR 2009 BOMBAY 171 ::2009 (5) AIR Bom R 315 ::2009 (6) AKAR (NOC) 1022 (BOM.) ::2010 A I H C 191 ::(2009) 4 AllMR 803 (BOM) ::2009 (4) All MR 803 ::2009 (3) BomCR 686 ::2009 (5) Mah LJ 41

Bombay High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): S. J. Vazifdar , J

(A) Presidency Towns Insolvency Act (3 of 1909) S. 21 — Annulment of insolvency — Application for — Can be filed by the debtor who was adjudged an insolvent — A debtor falls within scope of expression “any person interested” used in S 21 (Para 14,15)

(B) Presidency Towns Insolvency Act (3 of 1909) S. 21 — Annulment of insolvency — Application for by ‘person interested’ — On ground that he ought not to have been adjudged insolvent — Not maintainable when order of adjudication was passed by or confirmed by appellate Court or the Supreme Court — Doctrine of binding precedent would be applicable in such cases Constitution of India, Art 141 {" In the present case the application under S. 21 is not maintainable as the petition for adjudication, which was contested by the parties including the insolvent who has taken out the present notice of motion, was decided by the insolvency Court and the decision of the learned single Judge stood merged in the decision of the appeal Court. An order of annulment in the present notice of motion would be contrary to and constitute an interference with the order and judgment of the Appeal Court which is not permissible. This does not militate against the provisions of S. 21 where-by it is mandatory for the Court to annul the adjudication where it is of the opinion that the debtor ought not to have been adjudged insolvent. To reiterate, it is not open in these circumstances for the Court to form an independent opinion as to whether or not the debtor ought to have been adjudged insolvent as the question having already been not merely decided by the learned single Judge but the decision of the learned single Judge having been confirmed by ....