SUPREME COURT.—IN BANKRUPTCY.

Otago Witness, Issue 1320, 17 March 1877, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.— IN BANKRUPTCY.

(Before His Honour Mr Justice Williams.) ORDERS OF DISCHARGE. In the case of Edmond Chamberlain, Mr Aldrich applied for an order of discharge, which was granted. In the case of John Austin, Mr Stout (instructed by Joyce and Adams) applied for an order of discharge. — Order granted. In the ca3e of Andrew Craig, an order of discharge was granted. COSEPIBMATION OP RESOLUTIONS ACCEPTING COMPOSITION. In the case of James Tyree and William Tyree, Mr Stewart Btated that the debtors had agreed to pay their creditors 7s 6d in the £. Toe creditors had passed resolutions accepting this composition, and he (Mr Stewart) now applied for confirmation of the resolutions by the Court, undei section 119 of the Act. His Honour granted an order confirming the resolutions. ALLEGED MALADMINISTRATION BT A TRUSTEE. In the case of James Muir, Mr Howorth applied to have the deed declared completely executed. Mr Stout said he appeared on behalf of the creditors to oppose the declaration of complete execution, because of the manner in which the Trustee/ had effected the winding up of the estate. \ The facts of the case were as follows : — Muir was in difficulties, a writ having been taken out against him by the now opposing creditor. He then filed a deed of arrangement. A meeting of creditors wss held, ut which very fevsr creditors were present. The Trustee attended with proxies from other creditors. The Trustee was appointed, and he had allowed the bankrupt to occupy the premises, and had not complied xrith the Act in any respect by realising the property, &c. His (Mr Stouf s) client was informed by one of the creditors who had assented to the deed, that his debt had been paid in fulL He submitted that until enquiry had been made into the manner in which the Trustee had conducted the estate, the complete execution of the deed should not be declared. The Trustee and debtor had between them delayed the winding up of the estate, and the debtor had gone on selling as if nothing had happened. On the face of it, the deed was for the immediate winding up of the estate. Therefore, he submitted that until some opportunity was afforded to the Trustee to file a report showing what had been done, the deed should not be declared completely executed. Mr Howorth submitted that his learned friend had shown no ground for withholding the order declaring the deed completely executed. A dividend of 15s in the £ had been offered, and was accepted by all the creditors except his learned friend's client. He had been informed by hia learned friend or by some one from bis office that the real ground of opposition was that it was thought the debtor really had no business to .file, because the estate was able to pay 20s in the £. He contended that the action of the Trustee could not be called in question under this application. The only question he (Mr Howoxth) had to answer was whether the provisions of the Act had been complied with? Mr Stout: Who do you appear for ? Mr Howorth : For the Trustee. Mr Stout : Then I have the right to call his action in question. _ Mr Howorth said it was for the benefit of creditors that the application was made. All the provisions of the Act had been complied with. Mr Stout submitted that as this was an application by the Trustee, the Court had a right to enquire into his conduct in the matter. Bis Honour said that if the provisions of the Act had bean complied with, and all the necessary formalities gone through, the Court would still have power to enquire into the conduct of the Trustee as to how he administered the trusts of the deed. But that seemed to him to be a separateproceeding. Mr Stout would ask His Honour to adjourn the application, to allow him to issue a summons, calling upon the Trustee to show cause with respect to the way in which he administered the estate; otherwise, his client would be without remedy. His Honour said surely that was not the case. Even after the deed vras declared completely executed, the Court would still have power. Even if maladministration were proved, that would be no reason why the deed should not be declared completely executed. __ Mr Stout said he would now make application for a summon?, calling upon the Trustee to show cause. His Honour said there was no need for a rule to show cause. It could be put in the shape of a motion. Mr Stout : Very well ; if the other side will consent to the Trustee being examined next bankruptcy day. Mr Howorth: I have no instructions Mr Stout eaid in that case he must ask for a summons calling on the Trustee and arranging debtor to be examined, and to show cause why the trusts of the deed had not been complied with. His Honour said an affidavit would be sarwpBc?Stout said there was no provision in the Bankruptcy Act for that, but he was prepared to put Ms client into the box. Hia Honour said there must be something before the Court — either viva voce evidence or an affidavit. He thought it better that the usual course should be followed, and if an affidavit were filed, he would take it next day. A POINT OF PRACTICE. Mr Howorth : Yeur Honour, I observe that you have taken judicial notice to-day of the Gazette. I filed an affidavit in some cases, but I see you have granted orders this morning withcut affidavit. Hia Honour : On production of the Gazette, I believe^ that was the practice in my predecessor's time ; and I see no objection to it. At 1 first I thought an affidavit wa3 necessary, but Ido not now think it is. I shall be content with the production of the Gazette. j BE JOSEPH JTACKAY. j Argument of rule nisi, calling upon the National Bank of New Zealand (Limited) to show cause why the order of adjudication granted by His Honour Mr Justice Williamson the 6th January, 1877, against Joseph iiackay, should not be set aside ; or why all the further proceedings in this matter should not be stayed. The grounds of the rule wera as follow : — (1.) That the said Bank had proved for the debt and moneys owing to such Bank by Joseph Mackay in the bankruptcy proceedings initiated and pending in the District Court of Tokomairiro and Clutha, and had appeared and voted in said proceedings. (2.) That the Bank had come in and elected to take advantage of such proceedings. Mr Stout appeared to show cause on behalf of the National Bank, and Mr W. D. Stewart appeared on behalf of the bankrupt. After argument, His Honour said he would reserve his decision,