( 1 ) THE point that has been referred to us for decision is :

"whether a decree obtained against a minor is void because the guardian appointed by the Court had been guilty of gross negligence or is it merely voidable?"

( 2 ) THE reference was made by reason of the fact that there was a difference of opinion on the point between the Oudh Chief Court and the Allahabad High Court before its amalgamation. In mohammad Baksh v. Allah Din, 17 Luck. 1: (A. I. R. (29) 1942 Oudh 33) a Bench of the Oudh chief Court -- Bennett and Madeley JJ.-- had held that such a decree was merely voidable at the option of the minor; while in Dwarika Halwai v. Sitla Prasad, I. L. R. (1940) ALL. 344; (A. I. R. (27) 1940 ALI. 256), Bennet and Verma JJ. had held that the decree was null and void. Both. the decisions were, however, said to be based on a Full Bench decision of this Court in Mt. Siraj fatma v. Mahmud Ali, 54 ALL. 646 : (A. I. R. (19) 1932 ALL. 293 F. B. ).

( 3 ) THE point for consideration before the Full Bench in Mt. Siraj Fatma, v. Mahmud Ali, (54 all. 646 : A. I. R. (19) 1932 ALL. 293 F. B.) was whether a minor had a right to institute a suit in the civil Court to avoid a decree or