In Re: of Fazal Valji Virani trading as Virani Grocery Stores (Cause No. 17/1930.) [1930] EACA 108 (1 January 1930)

INSOLVENCY JURISDICTION.

Before Dickinson. J.

IN THE MATTER of FAZAL VALJI VIRANI trading as VIRANI GROCERY STORES.

Gause No. 17/1930.

- The Bankruptcy Ordinance. 1925 (No 1 of 1926), section 17-Section $27$ —inquiry as to public examination of debtor. debtor's conduct, dealings and property. - Held: That the proceedings under Section 17, are strictly the public examination of the debtor, and that the real object of Section 27,<br>is to enable a Trustee to enquire into the whereabouts of the assets of the Bankrupt.

The Court cannot use its powers under Section 27 to enforce the attendance of witnesses at the public examination of the debtor.

Ralston for trustee.

Barret for debtor.

Dr. Keatinge, Official Receiver.

JUDGMENT.-Mr. Ralston for the Trustee applies that the further examination of the bankrupt be adjourned and that the Court shall issue subpoenas to various persons to attend and give evidence on oath as to their dealings with the bankrupt, under section 27 of the Bankruptcy Law. It would be idle to pretend that the bankrupt has given either a full or honest account of his affairs, and it is quite likely that if certain persons mentioned by the bankrupt in his statement were forced into Court to give evidence that the Court would then be better informed as to the bankrupt's business dealings than it is at present. Mr. Barret for the bankrupt objects that the proceedings before the Court are the "Public Examination of the Debtor," and that such proceedings are limited by the procedure set out in section 17 of the Bankruptey law, and that this section 17 makes no provision for the public examination of other persons.

Mr. Barret further submits that section 27 under which Mr. Ralston has framed his application is under a different heading of the law, viz: "Control over person and property of the debtor," that this section 27 of our law is identical with section 25 of the English Act, and that Williams on Bankruptcy describes the enquiry prescribed by this section 25 as "Private Examination" in the heading to the pages dealing with this section. Doubtless the idea of examining a trader witness in open Court as to his dealings with a bankrupt is regarded as unfair to such a witness, and liable to damage his commercial credit.

The Court would naturally be chary of granting such an application as untold damage might result to the witness.

It appears to me that the real object of section 27 is to enable a trustee to enquire into the whereabouts of the assets of the bankrupt, and this he may do privately; and if the person having business relations with the bankrupt declines to assist the trustee then the trustee may apply to the Court for leave to have such person brought before the Court (or being a private examination before a Judge in Chambers) to answer interrogatories and depose on oath to such other matters as shall tend to elicit where any such assets of the bankrupt may be.

I think the only way in which any person other than the bankrupt may be brought before the Court at the public examination of a debtor would be by a subpana duces tecum, when such other person would not be subjected to a general examination but the examination would be strictly limited to the proof of the document or documents called for.

I find therefore that I cannot hear other witnesses in the present public proceedings which is strictly the public examination of the bankrupt.