CHITTY
Brijratan – Appellant
Versus
Jaynarain – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Chttty, J. - These are two rules obtained by the defendants in suit No. 85 of 1909, calling on the plaintiffs to show cause (i) why the decree in the suit should not be amended by inserting a clause as to the payment by the plaintiffs to the defendants of interest accumulated on certain Government promissory notes up to the 22nd September 1909and (ii) why the execution issued in this suit against the effects of the defendants should not be set aside and the attached property released. The facts are shortly as follows: The plaintiffs and the defendants are members of a Marwari family, and the matters at issue between them were in respect of the various businesses carried on by members of the family in partnership. In the early part of 1909 the present suit was filed in the names of the plaintiffs, who are minors, by Musammat Gota, their mother and next friend. Buldeo Dass, father of the present defendant Jaynarain, and grandfather of the two minor defendants, was the original defendant. I am told that the terms of settlement which were eventually come to were in the main proposed and arranged by him. In July 1909 Buldeo Dass died, and the present defendants on the record wer
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.