SUPREME COURT.—IN BANKRUPTCY.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 6791, 20 November 1883, Page 4

SUPREME COURT.—IN BANKRUPTCY.

Monday, November 19, (Before Mr Registrar Gordon.) WNAL OBDEBS.

Final orders of discharge were granted a* follows t —Charles Clark (for whom 61r Solomon, appeared) j James Archibald (Mr AdaiiiS for the debtor).. . . ...-.■, •■•. , . DEEDS b£eOUTEd'. . ■.. , r .-, < ...The deed was declared completely executed in the matter of William Wishart, Mr Ktchett supporting the application. . . •„ ~,. On Mr Hislop'a motion the deed was also declared executed in re Thpmas Roulstoni

; PETITION FOR ADJUDICATION, i.Mr Gallaway applied on behalf of a petitioningcreditor to have William Edward Hanlon, of Port Chalmers, adjudicated a bankrupt. Mr A, S. Adams appeared on behalf of the debtor to oppose. Mr Gallaway explained that the debtor was sued for £80 in the Resident Magistrate's Court, and judgment was entered up, execution was issued, and a return nulla lona made. On those grounds the present proceedings were taken.

Mr Adams submitted that no warrant to sue had been filed ; also that the summons was not in terms of the Debtors and Creditors Act. .

The Registrar : lam of opinion. that your objection to the service of the summons cannot be upheld, and that your other objection to the Supreme Court rules that no warrant has been filed does not apply. In these proceedings we are guided by the Bankiuptcy rules. Mr Adams further urged that the form of affidavits verifying the petition did not conform with the Supreme Court rules.

The Registrar: The Supreme Court rulea do not apply in a case of this sort. I think there is sufficient before me that aprima facie caso of bankruptcy has been made out, and that the debtor must be adjudicated a bank-' rupt. The following order was then made: —Debtor adjudicated a bankrupt, and to appear on Monday next, the 26th inst.; first meeting of creditors at 2 p.m. same day. . Mr Adams gave notice of appeal to the Judge on the following grounds:—(l) That no warrant of attorney has been filed by the plaintiff's solicitor ; (2) that the summons was not in accordance with section 30 of '• The Debtors and Creditors' Act 1876"; (3) that the copy of the summons served on the debtor did not purport to be under the seal of the Court; (4) that the affidavit verifying the petition was incorrect.