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

1931 Supreme(All) 341

BENNET
Lakhmi Chand – Appellant
Versus
B. Ram Lal Kapoor Vakil – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Bennet, J. - This is a second appeal by the defendants against concurring orders of the two lower Courts that the plaintiff should be granted a decree on a claim for debt due from the defendants on a promissory note and on account books to the estate of one Bika Ram deceased. The only point which was argued before us was whether the suit was correctly brought in the name of B. Ramlal Kapoor, vakil, as curator of the property of Bika Ram, deceased. The plaint set forth that the plaintiff was appointed curator of this estate and that he was instructed by the Court of the Additional District Judge to realize the outstanding debts due to the deceased and that this order had been notified in the Government Gazette. In reply to this application the written statement, para. 1, stated that the contents of para. 1 were not known to the defendants. A distinction is to be drawn between this pleading of " not known " and the pleading in regard to the other paragraph of the plaintiff which was " not admitted." We consider that it cannot be held that the pleading " not known " is tantamount to the pleading "not admitted" and therefore we consider the defendants not having made the correc

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