BAI MANI Vs. USAFALI BHUDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This was a suit brought by the plaintiff to recover from defendant 3 and the joint family estate of the other defendants the sum misappropriated by the deceased Bhimashankar Motiram who was the guardian of the minor appointed by the District Judge of Ahmedabad.

(2.) The learned Subordinate Judge passed a decree against the estate of the deceased Bhimashankar Motiram in the hands of the other defendants and the joint estate of defendants 3 and 4 and a personal decree only against defendant 8 on the ground that he hid signed a statement on 17 August 1925. Defendant 1 is the widow, defendant 2 the son, and defendants 3 and 4 are the brothers of the deceased Bhimashankar. On appeal by the defendants no cross objections were filed by the plaintiff, and the learned Assistant Judge varied the decree of the Subordinate Judge, and passed a decree against defendants I to 4 and made them personally liable.

(3.) It is urged in this second appeal that the decree, in so far as it made defendants 1, 2 and 4 personally liable in the absence of any cross objections, was erroneous, that defendants 1, 3 and 4 were not liable personally for the debts 01 the deceased, and that the son defendant 2 was not liable to pay the debt of his father as it was tainted with illegality and immorality.