JAGDEO SINGH Vs. SITLA PD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a defendants' appeal from a decree of the learned Civil Judge of Faizabad decreeing the plaintiffs suit.

(2.) THE suit was for cancellation of a sale deed executed by the grandmother of the plaintiff as his guardian on 23-8-1939. The plaintiff's case was that the property was ancestral property of the plaintiff, and his grandmother was not his guardian inasmuch as his mother was also alive. It was next contended that the deed was executed without any legal necessity, and the guardian had failed to claim the benefits of the Agriculturists' Relief Act and the Debt Redemption Act.

(3.) THE main defences to the suit were that the mother of the plaintiff had remarried soon after the death of the father, and the grandmother was the legal and de facto guardian of the plaintiff. She, therefore, could not act as his guardian. It was also alleged that the deed was executed for legal necessity, and for payment of the antecedent debts of the minor's father. The third plea was that the plaintiff brought a suit in 1942 under the guardianship of his mother; but this suit was withdrawn with liberty to bring a fresh suit. As a condition for granting leave to withdraw the suit, the court ordered that the suit was permitted to be withdrawn on two conditions, namely, that a fresh suit was to be instituted within a year of the date of the order, and that the plaintiff paid the costs incurred by the defendants, before bringing the suit. This order was passed on 14-3-1942. The present suit was brought in 1947 without paying costs, and the defence was that the suit was, therefore, not maintainable, though costs were subsequently deposited in the trial court.