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

1914 Supreme(All) 81

P. C. BANERJI
Sita Ram – Appellant
Versus
Subheda Kuar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

P.C. Banerji, J. - The facts of the case out of which this appeal arises are these. One Musammat Subachani obtained a decree in the Court of Small Causes at Cawnpore against one Baldeo Singh. After the death of Baldeo Singh she applied for execution of the decree and prayed that the present plaintiff, Musammat Subheda Kuar, be declared to be the legal representative of the deceased. Subheda Kuar objected denying that she was such legal representative. Her objection was allowed on February 2, 1902, and the Court held that she was not the legal representative of the deceased Baldeo Singh. Tin's order became final, but inspite of it the present appellant applied for execution of the decree in 1905 and in his application named the plaintiff as the legal representative of the deceased. I am informed that he made the application for execution not as the legal representative of Subachan Kuar who had in the meantime died, but on the allegation that he was the real owner of the decree. Execution of the decree was transferred to the Court of the Munsif of Cawnpore and a half share in certain groves was attached as the property of Baldeo Singh which was sold by auction and was purchas

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