SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1959 Supreme(Raj) 243

D.S.DAVE
ANANDRAM – Appellant
Versus
MADHOLAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Govind Mal, Raj Narain

Judgment


D. S. DAVE, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application in revision by two minor judgment-debtors through their next friend and mother Mst. Tikudi, against an order of the learned Judge Small Cause Court, Jodhpur, D/-30-7-1957.

( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to it are that non-petitioner No. 1 Madhotal and his two sons filed a money suit against the petitioners and their rather Amarlal, who is non-petitioner No. 4 in this Court. The said suit was decreed against all the defendants on 6-10-1952. On 26-3-57, the petitioners filed an application under Section 151 C. P. C. in the Court of Judge, Small Causes, Jodhpur. It was urged on behalf of the petitioners that the trial Court had not appointed any guardian ad litem for them, that the decree against them was, therefore, void and their names should be struck off from the decree-sheet. This application was dismissed by the learned Judge and hence the present revision application.

( 3 ) IT is urged by learned counsel for the petitioners that the learned Judge Small Cause Court has committed a grave error of law in refusing to set aside the decree, which was passed against the minors even though they were not represented by any guardian dul



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top