Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 6.djvu/601

 IN BE HTDB. 589 �when there are no longer any known assets to be aistributed among creditors, " �The question adjoumed must be taken to be based on the facts asserted in the statement of the question : (1) That deeds oi land were given by the officiai assignee, purporting to be executed under orders tnade by the district court; (2) that the deeds were executed by the assignee improvidently, ir- regularly, or without due authority; (3) that the deeds were procured to be executed by the assignee by imposition und fraudulent. practice upon the court; (4) that the deeds were designedly so drawn as to be grants in excess of, or varying in material particulars f rom, the said orders ; (5) that the deeds are still in the hands of the party who so procured them from the assignee; (6) that the said party had notice of the said irregularities and defects ; (Y) that the said party gave no value for the said deeds except certain sutias paid iu the officiai assignee as fees. �On the foregoing facta the questions to be considered are— (1) Whether the district court, sitting in bankruptcy, and ex- ercising the juri^dictaon conferred by said aet, bas power.by summary order,ito: set aside^said deedej^ and power also to order them tos be surrendered aJid can<ielled'; {2) whether it can do so on the petition of a party who isPnot a idreditor o{ the bankrupt and'.has no interest in the matter except that he is in the possession of land, claiming title thereto, and that he bas been subjected to litigatiomy or is threatened with litigation, in respect to said land, based Upon said deeds; (3) whether^t can do so after the discharge of the bankrupt, and when there are no longer any known assets to be distributed among creditors. �The order of adjoumment shows that the question was adjoumed on the application of the respondent -holding the deeds referred to, and that he appeared by counsel before the district court. He appears in this court by counsel, who urges that the inquiries made should be answered in the neg- ative. It is contended that the inquiry is not as to the in- herent power of the district court to grant the relief referred to, under the facts stated, but is as to its power to do so on ��� �