ORDER : G.C. Mathur, J. This is an appeal u/s 75(2) of the Provincial Insolvency Act against the order of the District Judge, Muzaffarnagar, rejecting the application of the Appellant for declaring the Respondent an insolvent. 2. The facts are very simple. The opposite party executed a sale-deed transferring land in favour of his wife on March 23, 1969, and presented it for registration the same day. The sale-deed was actually registered on April 16, 1969. In the meantime on April 1, 1969, the opposite party on the basis of a pronote executed on the same date took a loan of Rs. 12,700/- from the applicant. When the applicant came to know of the sale-deed, he on May 17, 1971, filed the application before the District Judge for adjudging the opposite party an insolvent. The District Judge has held that the sale-deed having been executed on a date before the debt was taken the Respondent could not be said to have committed an act of insolvency. 3. The learned Counsel for the Appellant has contended on the authority of the decision of the Supreme Court in Firm Mukand Lal Veer Kumar and Another Vs. Purushottam Singh and Others, AIR 1968 SC 1182 that the sale-deed become effective from the date of registration and, therefore, the sale amounted to an act of insolvency, as it was executed with the intention of defrauding the Appellant. The simple question for consideration is whether the intention to defraud is to be seen on the date of the execution of the sale-deed or on the date of its registration. Obviously, the intention and object of a transferor must come into existence at the time when he executes the sale-deed and it is the same intention which continues till the sale-deed, is registered. On the date on which the sale-deed was executed the debt had not even come into existence and, therefore, it cannot be said that the transferor had any intention to de-feat the creditor. The decision of the Supreme Court is not applicable to this case. It has been held there that for the purposes of calculating the limitation for filing the petition the act of insolvency must be and deemed to have taken place on the date of the registration of the sale-deed the date on which the sale-deed becomes effective. Here the question is different. It has been held there that for the purposes of calculating the limitation for filing the petition the act of insolvency must be and deemed to have taken place on the date of the registration of the sale-deed the date on which the sale-deed becomes effective. Here the question is different. The question is whether any act of insolvency was, at all, committed. In view of what has been stated above, I am in agreement with the District Judge that no act of insolvency has been proved. The application was rightly rejected by the District Judge. 4. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. Since no one has appeared to contest the appeal, there will be no order as to costs.