The controversy arose from the Official Assignee's insistence that claims in insolvency proceedings must be based on a decree or order from a competent court. This stance was challenged by the counsel for the insolvents, leading the High Court to frame a specific legal question for adjudication regarding the necessity of a decree for making a claim before the Official Assignee.
A claim was lodged by a creditor with the official assignee.
The official assignee, relying on certain orders, stated that claims could not be considered unless adjudicated by a Court or competent authority.
Counsel for the insolvent objected to the official assignee's stance.
On January 30, 2026, the Court framed a question for adjudication regarding the necessity of a decree for claims.
Mr. Mehta and Mr. Darshit Jain were requested to assist the Court as counsel.
Mr. Mehta, representing Insolvent No.1 in Insolvency Petition No.82 of 2002, submitted that no decree is required for making a claim before the official assignee.
Mr. Jain, Amicus Curiae, adopted Mr. Mehta's submissions and drew parallels with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) provisions.
…Sign in to view the parties.
The Court framed a question for adjudication…
Justice Jitendra Jain delivered the…
Sign in to view related legal provisions.
The controversy arose from the Official Assignee's insistence that claims in insolvency proceedings must be based on a decree or order from a competent court. This stance was challenged by the counsel for the insolvents, leading the High Court to frame a specific legal question for adjudication regarding the necessity of a decree for making a claim before the Official Assignee.
A claim was lodged by a creditor with the official assignee.
The official assignee, relying on certain orders, stated that claims could not be considered unless adjudicated by a Court or competent authority.
Counsel for the insolvent objected to the official assignee's stance.
On January 30, 2026, the Court framed a question for adjudication regarding the necessity of a decree for claims.
Mr. Mehta and Mr. Darshit Jain were requested to assist the Court as counsel.
Mr. Mehta, representing Insolvent No.1 in Insolvency Petition No.82 of 2002, submitted that no decree is required for making a claim before the official assignee.
Mr. Jain, Amicus Curiae, adopted Mr. Mehta's submissions and drew parallels with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) provisions.
…The Court framed a question for adjudication…
Justice Jitendra Jain delivered the…
Sign in to view related legal provisions.