Based upon these settled principles itself I am inclined to observe that
there is no question of enlarging and or extending the definition of
the word “order” and “court” if it is not specifically provided under the
Insolvency Act. The governing law i.e. the CPC also no where permit
or provide to initiate such insolvency proceedings. There is no
question of permitting the party to invoke insolvency provisions
when the CPC and or insolvency Act no where permits to initiate
insolvency proceedings based upon the foreign judgment and or
decree. The concept of foreign court and or judgment is defined and
prescribed under the CPC. This itself means that the concept and
term “court” as provided under the insolvency Act means an Indian
Court only. I am declined to accept that the court and or order and
or decree so contemplated under the insolvency Act means a foreign
court, foreign judgment or foreign decree. Such drastic proceedings
just cannot be initiated which have presumption or assumption value
and or by enlarging definitions as sought to be contended by the
learned counsel appearing for the judgment creditor in support of
initiation of such insolvency proceedings. In my view it is
impermissible and it is without jurisdiction. We have to read
intention of the legislature by reading the plain language used in
the statute, considering the scheme and purports of the C.P.C. and
the insolvency Act, apart from the concept of intraborder or national
or international treaties and convention and aspects of territorial as
well as courts' jurisdiction. If the Act is silent and if there is no
provision, there is no question to read or go beyond the existing
provisions of law. The court cannot read anything beyond the
statutory provisions which has plain language. There is no question
to enlarge the meaning and or putting something into the statute,
specifically when the provisions are clear and specific
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
IN INSOLVENCY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 53 OF 2011
IN
INSOLOVENCY NOTICE NO. 28 OF 2011
Abraaj Investment Management Ltd.,
V/s.
Mr. Neville Tuli s/o. Ramjidas Tuli ..
CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.
PRONOUNCED ON : 17 DECEMBER, 2012
Citation;AIR 2013 (NOC)91 bombay
