MOHINDER SINGH Vs. GURNAM SINGH, ETC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is second appeal by Mohinder Singh plaintiff against Gurnam Singh and Jarnail Singh defendants. The appellant has impleaded his brother Ghamand Singh as proforma respondent. Facts leading to the appeal are as under :-

(2.) The above pleadings of the parties gave rise to the following three issues :-

(3.) The trial Court held under issue No. 1 that the plaintiff was minor on March 19, 1966 when compromise decree had been passed and that on issue No. 2, it gave the finding that he having not attained majority on March 19, 1966, the consent decree was effective against him and bind him. The appeal filed against the consent decree having been dismissed before the date when the judgment was pronounced, the trial Court held that issue No. 3 had become redundant and did not survive for consideration. On appeal, the Additional District Judge took the view that on the date of institution of the suit on March 23, 1965 the plaintiff was a minor but he became major on March 19, 1966 and hence he was entitled to represent himself in Court and could not be represented by his guardian for entering into compromise. Having found that the plaintiff had become major on the date of compromise the Court took the view that as the plaintiff was entitled to defend the suit himself or allow himself to be represented by his guardian and having not chosen to represent himself in the case, the compromise could be entered on his behalf by his guardian Ghamand Singh.