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

1950 Supreme(Mad) 191

SATYANARAYANA RAO
Rajarathna Vaduganatha Pillai – Appellant
Versus
Srinivasa Raghava Aiyangar – Respondent


Advocates:
N. Rajagapala Aiyangar for Petitioner.
The Government Pleader (K. Kuttikrishna Menon), K.V. Ramachandra Aiyar, T.S. Venkatarama Aiyar and S.V. Venugopalachari for Respondents.

Judgment

The decision of the lower Court is correct. The Full Bench in Hussain Sahib v. Ayesha Bibi1, decided that a quondam minor impeaching an alienation made by a certificated guardian without sanction of the Court is bound to sue to set aside the sale. This is not a case where the minor avoided the transaction by anything done before suit. He chose the institution of the suit as the only mode of avoidance and he is bound to include in the plaint a prayer for setting aside the transaction. The fact that the sanction is impeached on the ground of fraud and collusion would not make any difference. It would utmost be in the event of fraud being established a case where no sanction was obtained for the transfer. The view taken by the lower Court regarding the transaction is correct. The minor was a party to the decree through a guardian. He is therefore bound to sue to set aside the decree, and the Court-fee directed to be paid under section 7(IV-A) of the Court-Fees Act. The civil revision petition is dismissed with costs.

V.S. ----- Petition dismissed.


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