Mehul Jagdish Trivedi Vs Manisha Mehul Trivedi (Bombay High Court)
Summary: The petition before the Bombay High Court was filed under Section 14 of the Presidency-Towns Insolvency Act, 1909, seeking a declaration that the petitioner be adjudged insolvent and that execution proceedings arising from a Family Court maintenance order dated 17 May 2021 be stayed. The petitioner, a dance teacher, had married the respondent in January 2014, and disputes arose within two months, leading to proceedings before the Family Court. The Family Court directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 25,000 per month to his wife under Section 125 CrPC from 15 June 2015. The petitioner challenged that order separately through a Criminal Revision Petition, which is pending.
The petitioner argued that he earned between Rs. 12,000 and Rs. 15,000 per month and that arrears of approximately Rs. 22,30,000 could not be paid. Claiming inability to discharge the financial obligation, he sought to be declared insolvent, relying on Sections 14(1)(a), 9(1)(f), 10, and the explanation to Section 10 of the Insolvency Act.
The Court examined the statutory provisions. Section 14(1)(a), which requires debts of at least Rs. 500 for a debtor to petition, was held to provide only eligibility to file such a petition, not a mandate for automatic adjudication. The Court emphasized that the use of the word “may” in Section 10 and its explanation indicates judicial discretion to adjudicate a debtor insolvent, not an obligation. Section 11(a), which restricts jurisdiction to cases where the debtor is imprisoned in execution of a decree at the time of filing the petition, was found inapplicable since the petitioner was not imprisoned when filing the petition.
