Krishnaswamy Aiyangar, J.@mdashPrayer (c) is the only outstanding matter to be dealt with. The applicant who has been found to be a creditor
was denied participation in the dividend by reason of a fraud practised upon the Court by the insolvent. It was represented that the applicant had
agreed to have her rights postponed to those of the other creditors and that she was a major at the time. It is clear that she was not a major at the
time and there is reason to think that the learned advocate who purported to act for her proceeded upon a mistake of fact in making such a
representation to the Court. In these circumstances I hold that the payment of dividends to the other creditors cannot be held to have been duly
made within the meaning of the expression in Section 31 of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act. The creditors who received dividends from the
Official Assignee shall pay back into his hands such amount each as is necessary to make up the proper dividend payable to the applicant on the
amount of her admitted claim. The creditors in the list herewith appended will pay to the Official Assignee the several sums set out against their
names respectively making a total of Rs. 932-1-9 which I understand will be sufficient to pay Rs. 0-4-3 in the rupee to all the creditors including
the applicant.
