NAGINDAS MANEKLAL Vs. MAHOMAD YUSUF MITCHELA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit for specific perform, by the plaintiff of a contract which was entered into with him by defendants Nos. 1 and 2 who were the adult members of a joint Hindu family. The immovable property winch contacted to sell was ancestral, and the ground upon which the suit for specific performance was resisted was that defendants Nos. 1 and 2 at date of the contract had minor sons who had vested interests in the property and that as the family was in a good condition it was not necessary to sell it. Both the lower Courts have allowed the plaintiff's claim.

(2.) It is cntended that defendants Nos. 1 and 2 have no power according to Hindu law to alienate the ancestral estate so as to bind the interests of the minor member of the family without legal necessity; and it is further contended that no legal necessity is proved and that benefit to the minors is not sufficient to justify the sale. Several caases have been cited in the course of the argument on the question whether the Court could grant specific performance of the contract against defendants Nos. 1 and 2, who, it is said, were not competent according to Hindu low to convey the interests of their minor sonsin the absence of legal necessity.

(3.) It is, however, essential first to look to the facts found in this case. The issus raised in the lower appellate Court was, whether this contract was for the benefit of the family and binding on the minors. The finding of the lower appellate Court was against the defendants. It is found that- The defendants meant to sell the house in suit for the evident advantage or benefit of the whole family and therefore for the benefit or advantage of thir minor sons also. If the house fill down completely and remained in that ruinous condition it would not fetch the price the plaintiff has agreed to pay. It would fetch no rent as will. The sale for Rs. 1,975 would bring annually at least Rs 100 by way of interest to the family. The transaction was thus clearly and evidently one of decided advantage to the family and to the minor sons of the Defendants and did not at all savour of the nature of speculation.