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

1928 Supreme(All) 19

DALAL
Randhir Narain – Appellant
Versus
P. Jagannath – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Dalal, J. - I am afraid that a view in conflict with that of the District Judge is not possible, _ The District Judge himself admitted that the case was a hard one. A Hindu widow in the capacity of lamhardar recovered certain profits which she ought to have paid to the applicant, She did not do so and was, therefore, sued. In that suit a decree was passed against her. She died during the execution proceedings and the reversioner who was made a party objected that he was not liable under the decree as he was not successor-in-interest of the lady. The argument is quite sound. It is true that in the case of Risal Singh v. Balwant Singh 40 Ind. Cas. 28 C.L.J. 519 : 24 M.L.T. 361 : 9 L.W. 52 : 23 C.W.N. 326 : (1919) M.W.N. 155 : 36 M.L.J. 597 : 21 Bom. L.R. 511 : 45 I.A. 168 (P.C.), their Lordships held that a reversioner would be bound by a decree passed against a widow, as representing the estate, where the widow had an opportunity of defence and the decree was honest and properly passed. In the present case, however, the decree was passed against the Hindu widow for a personal act of not giving profits to co-sharers whose profits she had collected as lamhardar. She was not re

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