JUDGMENT 1. The appellant is an alienee of the insolvents property. He appeals against an order admitting the proof of a creditor. He is not a person aggrieved by the order admitting proof. He may be very remotely affected by the decision in favour of the creditor. This case is governed by the principle that an aggrieved person must be one who is affected by the order appealed against as put by James, L. J., in Ex parte Sidebotham; In re Sidebotham [1880] 14 Ch. D. 458. The fact that the appellant was allowed by the lower Court to cross-examine the witnesses of the creditor would not give him a locus standi in the proceedings so as to enable him to present an appeal against the order in favour of the creditor. The cases in Alagappa Chettiar v. Nagaratna Mudaliar [1917] 33 M.L.J. 612 and Kumarappa Chettiar v. Murugappa Chettiar [1916] 36 I.C. 771 are distinguishable from the facts of the present case. 2. The appeal is dismissed with costs.