SINGAMASETTY BHAGAVATH GUPTHA & ANR. versus ALLAM KARIBASAPPA (D) BY LRS./ALLAM DODDABASAPPA (D) BY LRS. & ORS.

SINGAMASETTY BHAGAVATH GUPTHA & ANR. versus ALLAM KARIBASAPPA (D) BY LRS./ALLAM DODDABASAPPA (D) BY LRS. & ORS.

The High Court erred in holding that Section 37 saved the transfer deed of 11.03.1983 because the District Court had found that the underlying documents (Ex.P.4 and Ex.P.6) were fabricated and that there was no final, valid transaction prior to adjudication; for Section 37 to protect a transfer, the transactions/orders of the court or receiver must be valid and have attained finality and appellate courts must independently reappreciate evidence before overturning trial findings. Consequently the appeals by the purchasers fail and the District Court judgment dated 16.02.2004 is restored.

Parties
Appellants: Singamasetty Bhagavath Guptha & Anr.; Respondents: Allam Karibasappa (D) by Lrs./Allam Doddabasappa (D) by Lrs. & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
25 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Against Judgment of Karnataka High Court Dated 25.02.2011 in MFA Nos. 2873 and 2706 of 2004
Outcome
Civil Appeal Nos. 12048-12049 of 2018 allowed; judgment and order of Additional Judge, Bellary in I.A. NO. XV in I.C. No. 2/75 c/w Ms. C. No.5/2000 dated 16.02.2004 restored; Civil Appeal Nos. 12050-12053 of 2018 dismissed.
Legal Topics
Annulment of Adjudication, Section 37 Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920, Validity of Transfers by Official Receiver, Appellate Review of Factual Findings
Insolvency Law Property Law Civil Procedure Annulment of Adjudication Section 37 Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 Validity of Transfers by Official Receiver Appellate Review of Factual Findings

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Singamasetty Bhagavath Guptha & Anr.

Appellants

Allam Karibasappa (D) by Lrs./Allam Doddabasappa (D) by Lrs. & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Against Judgment of Karnataka High Court Dated 25.02.2011 in MFA Nos. 2873 and 2706 of 2004

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether acts done by the official receiver between declaration of insolvency and annulment are saved under Section 37 of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920
  2. 2 Whether the transfer deed dated 11.03.1983 executed by the official receiver remained valid after annulment of adjudication
  3. 3 Whether the High Court erred in reversing the District Court’s factual findings regarding fabrication of documents Ex.P.4 and Ex.P.6

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court erred in holding that Section 37 saved the transfer deed of 11.03.1983 because the District Court had found that the underlying documents (Ex.P.4 and Ex.P.6) were fabricated and that there was no final, valid transaction prior to adjudication; for Section 37 to protect a transfer, the transactions/orders of the court or receiver must be valid and have attained finality and appellate courts must independently reappreciate evidence before overturning trial findings. Consequently the appeals by the purchasers fail and the District Court judgment dated 16.02.2004 is restored.

Court Disposition

Civil Appeal Nos. 12048-12049 of 2018 allowed; judgment and order of Additional Judge, Bellary in I.A. NO. XV in I.C. No. 2/75 c/w Ms. C. No.5/2000 dated 16.02.2004 restored; Civil Appeal Nos. 12050-12053 of 2018 dismissed.

Orders

  • Civil Appeal Nos. 12048-12049 of 2018 allowed
  • Judgment and order dated 16.02.2004 passed by the Additional Judge, Bellary in I.A. NO. XV in I.C. No. 2/75 c/w Ms. C. No.5/2000 is restored