ROHANI RAMANDHWAJ PRASAD SINGH Vs. HAR PRASAD SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is the proprietor of an estate called the Biswan Estate at Aligarh. In 1983 respondent No.3, Mahabir Singh, herein called "the plaintiff" brought a suit in farma pauperis claiming the estate and seeking to eject the appellant's elder brother who was then in possession. THE elder brother died while the suit was pending and the appellant who was a minor at the time was substituted in his stead as the defendant and the Court of Wards acted on his behalf. THE trial Court gave decree for the plaintiff on June 2, 1925, but on February 12, 1929, the High Court at Allahabad reversed this decision and dismissed the suit. THEir decree was confirmed upon appeal to His Majesty in Council.

(2.) ON February 16, 1926, while the case was pending before it the High Court ordered that the plaintiff should be put in possession of the estate in execution of the trial Court's decree on his depositing in the trial Court security in the sum of Rs. 42,000. ON April 1, 1926, one Jiwan Singh, father of respondent No.1, Har Prasad Singh, executed a security bond which is the foundation of the present proceedings. This bond was not expressed to be in favour of any specified individual nor was any person other than Jiwan Singh mentioned as a party thereto, but by it Jiwan Singh hypothecated a number of items of zemindari property and the terms of the security were as follows : If the decree passed by the Court of first instance is amended or set aside by the Appellate Court, the plaintiff-respondent shall re-convey, the property, whereof he shall obtain possession under the security bond in the same condition as it is at present and shall pay, according to the orders of the Appellate Court, such amount of mesne profits in respect of the property in dispute as may be found due by the plaintiff decree-holder when the possession of the property is delivered. If the plaintiff fails to comply with the orders of the Appellate Court, the amount may be recovered by auction sale of the property hypothecated under this deed which is specified below. If the sale proceeds be inadequate, my person and other property shall remain liable to the extent of 'the amount of security and I, the executants, in person and my heirs and representatives shall remain liable for payment of the same.

(3.) IN 1933 the Court of Wards released the estate to the appellant who had attained majority and obtained from him a safinama dated March 10, 1933, discharging them from all obligations to or claims by him.