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

1884 Supreme(All) 20

BRODHURST, DUTHOIT, MAHMOOD, OLDFIELD, W. COMER PETHERAM
Kandhiya Lal – Appellant
Versus
Chandra – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Oldfield, J. - The answer to this reference seems to me afforded by the terms of Act XXVII of 1860. By that Act "no debtor of any person shall be compelled in any Court to pay his debt to any person claiming to be entitled to the effects of any deceased person, or any part thereof, except on production of a certificate, to be obtained in the manner hereinafter mentioned, or a probate or letters of administration, unless the Court shall be of opinion that payment of the debt is withheld from fraudulent or vexatious motives, and not from any reasonable doubt as to the party entitled."

2. The Act indicates the course to be taken by the heirs, and the debts should be collected by the administrator, and the assets distributed amongst the heirs.

3. The Court can permit an action to be brought by the heirs under the discretion allowed, but it can only properly do so when the party or parties suing are in a position to sue for the whole debt, for to permit one heir to realize his share would be to alter the nature of the contract, and to subject the debtor to inconveniences and hardships.

4. I would answer the reference in the negative.

Petheram, C.J. and Brodhurst, J.

5. concurred.

Duth

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