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

MOLDRICH v. CORNELIS et al.


Moldrich V. Cornelis Et Al.

Present: Hutchinson C.J. and Wood Renton J.   Oct.3,1910

MOLDRICH v. CORNELIS et al.

178- D. C. Galle, 9,941.

Bond by administrator and sureties for duly administering estate-Bond not strictly in Form 90, Schedule II.-Civil Procedure Code, ss. 538 and 751.

The administrator of the estate of an intestate and his sureties bound themselves to " D. M. Jansz, Secretary of the District Court of Galle, or to the Secretary of the District Court of Galle for the time being," in a penal sum.

Held, that the Secretary for the time being could sue on the bond, though it was not strictly in the form prescribed by section 538, Civil Procedure Code (Form 90, Schedule II.).

The Secretary may bring a separate action for enforcing the bond.

THE facts are fully set out in the judgments.

Elliott, for the defendants, appellants.-Section 538 of the Civil Procedure Code directs that the bond by an administrator and his sureties should be according to Form 90 of Schedule II. The bond sued upon is not in the form prescribed. Even if the bond were in the form specified, it is open to doubt whether the Secretary for the time being could sue upon a bond given

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