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

1943 Supreme(Mad) 284

BYERS
Madhava Pillai – Appellant
Versus
Subramaniya Udayar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Byers, J.

1. The short facts leading to this revision petition under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act are that a promissory note was executed by the defendants paternal grandmother as their de facto guardian for a sum due by their deceased father on a previous obligation. The plaintiff brought the suit on the promissory note only against the minors and it was summarily dismissed by the learned District Munsiff on the authority of Chennappa v. Onkarappa AIR1940Mad38 . There is a clear distinction to be drawn between the facts of the present case and the facts in the case cited, where the promissory note had been executed not by the grandmother as de facto guardian but by the deceased father himself and payments had subsequently been made by the paternal grandmother. It was held by the Full Bench that the grandmother in her capacity as de facto guardian was not an " agent duly authorised in this behalf" within the meaning of Section 21(1) of the Indian Limitation Act so as to be capable of extending limitation under Section 20(1) of the same Act and that although the grandmother might be the de facto guardian, she was not a lawful guardian. In the present ca

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