THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO C.R.P.6662 OF 2004 ORAL ORDER The revision petition is filed against the order in C.M.A.No.9 of 2003 on the file of the Court of IV Additional District & Sessions Judge, (F.T.C.) Medak at Siddipet. The revision petitioner is the petitioner in I.P.No.6 of 2000 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Siddipet. The petitioner has claimed that he indebted to several of the respondents and was unable to discharge the same and therefore he may be declared as an insolvent. After conducting the inquiry into the proceedings, the Insolvency Court found that the petitioner has failed to prove that he was indebted as claimed and also has failed to show the assets and finding that there are n o bona fides, the insolvency petition was dismissed. The lower appellate court also found that there are no bona fides. Evidently, in order to declare the petitioner as an insolvent some prima facie material is to be shown that he has indebted and that he was not able to discharge the debts and that his assets are far less than the debts owned by him. Evidently, no single suit was filed by any of the debtors claiming recovery of the money from the revision petitioner. Therefore, in the absence of any material to show that the petitioner is indebted to several persons and has done business and suffered loss, the question of inability to discharge the debts cannot be considered. Both the courts have appreciated the evidence on record and came to a conclusion that the petitioner seems to be lacking bona fides and therefore dismissed the same. I do not find any infirmity in the orders the courts below in dismissing the applications. Therefore, the Civil Revision Petition is liable to be dismissed. The point is accordingly answered. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. _______________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO,J 15-06-2011 TSNR