DALEEP SINGH Vs. KHURSHED HUSAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff-appellant for the recovery of money due on account of cloth supplied and money borrowed by the defendant, The defence, go far as it is material for the purpose of this appeal, was that the defendant was, at the time of the alleged transactions a ward of the Court of Wards and, therefore, incompetent to enter into a contract, to make him pesunierily liable, under Section 37 of the Court of Wards Act.

(2.) The Court of first instance decreed the claim; but the lower Appellate Court set aside the decree. The view taken by the Court of first instance was that the defendant was a ward as regards the property which he had inherited from Musammat Ahmadi Began) but Was not a ward as regards the property which he Owned in his Own right. The lower Appellate Court, however, held that he was a ward with respect to both the properties.

(3.) It appears that Musammat Ahmadi Begam was the owner of certain property, the superintendence of which was taken over by the Court of Wards on the 22nd August 1911. She died in 1913 leaving certain heirs, one of whom was the defendant. The Court of Wards retained the property of Mussmmat Ahmadi Begam under its superintendence under Section 45, because the debts due by the deceased had not been till then discharged. The property was eventually released on the 7 June 1918. The debts, not in question, had been incurred by the defendant between the 24 September 1916 and the 3 December 1916. Section 45 of Act IV of 1912 lays down that: When a ward dies...before the liquidation is completed of the debts and liabilities with which the property is charged, the Court of Wards may either release such property or may retain it under its superintendence until such debts and liabilities have been discharged.