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

1911 Supreme(All) 62

Muazzam Ali Shah – Appellant
Versus
Chunni Lal – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Sir George Knox and Karamat Husain, JJ. - One Lala Chunni Lal, who is respondent, has obtained a decree against one Syed Muazzam Ali Shah. The decree is for money due upon a contract entered into by the said Syed Muazzam Ali Shah after he had become a ward of the court. The decree-holder having obtained the decree has tried to execute it by attachment and sale of the judgment-debtor's movable property in a certain kothi in the Meerut Cantonment, Objection was taken apparently to the effect that u/s 19 of the Court of Wards Act (Act III of 1899), the decree-holder should apply for a certificate from the Collector that the claim was notified u/s 16.

2. The Munsif of Meerut held that it was too late to take this objection, but the learned Munsif appears to have overlooked the fact that the suit and proceedings in execution are a fraud upon the Court. u/s 49 of Act III of 1899 this suit should have been brought in the name of the Collector in charge of the property and not otherwise. As soon as it was brought to the notice of the Court that the judgment-debtor was a ward of court, the Court should have of its own motion then and there made the Collector a party and waited for su

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