Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
MUHAMMAD RAFIQ, PIGGOTT, JJ.
Subhag Singh – Appellant
Versus
Raghunandan Singh – Respondent
First Appeal No. 140 of 1918 from an order of Sri Lal, District Judge of Ghazipur
Decided on : 26-03-1914
JUDGMENT :
MUHAMMAD RAFIQ and PIGGOTT, JJ.:— This is an appeal under Act VIII of 1890 from an order passed by the learned District Judge of Ghazipur, appointing one Raghunandan Singh guardian of the person and property of his minor son-in-law, named Padam Deo Narain Singh. It appears that in addition to Raghunandan Singh there were two other persons who moved the lower court for their appointment, viz. Har Shankar Singh and Babu Subhag Singh. Har Shankar Singh described himself as the paternal uncle of the minor. The learned Judge as appears from the serial order, dated the 21st of February, 1913, asked the Collector of the district whether he was inclined to take the property of the minor under the management of the Court of Wards, and if not, to say which one of the three persons, viz. Raghunandan Singh, Har Shankar Singh and Subhag Singh was the fittest person for appointment as guardian of the person and property of the minor. A report was presumably called for by the Collector from the girdawar qanungo, who reported in favour of Raghunandan Singh. On the receipt of that report and without taking any further evidence in the case, the learned Judge appointed Raghunandan Singh as guardian and rejected the prayers of the other two persons. Subhag Singh has come up in appeal to this Court. He contends that the report of the qanungo cannot be treated in law as evidence in the case and that the learned Judge should have called upon the different claimants to give evidence and should have decided on that evidence. We think that this contention is well-founded and we therefore, set aside the order of the learned Judge under appeal and direct him to dispose of the applications and objections of the three persons named above, according to law. The costs of this appeal shall abide the event.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
