(1.) This is an appeal from a decree of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad of 25 July 1928, confirming, with a modification in its amount, a decree of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Agra dated 14 August 1925. The respondents, plaintiffs in the action in which these decrees were made, are members of the Committee of Management of the Balwant Rajput High School, Agra. The appellants, defendants to the action, are the sons of Thakur Dhianpal Singh, who was for many years secretary of the Committee. He died on 30 May 1923, the head of a joint undivided Hindu family.
(2.) The respondents in their plaint of 20 July 1924, claimed as sums to be paid by the appellants from the property loft them by their father and also out of the joint family property in their hands, the sum of Rs. 86,863-4-2, or such other sum as might be found due to them from Thakur Dhianpal Singh. The Subordinate Judge, decreed the suit for a principal sum of Rupees 48,143-1-2. The High Court, on appeal reduced the principal amount decreed to Rs. 42,993-4-2, but otherwise confirmed the decree of the Subordinate Judge. The defendants again appeal. As a liability of Thakur Dhianpal Singh, the amount is, before the Board, no longer in debate. The extent of his liability was seriously in issue in both Courts below. As a result, the proceedings there were highly involved. The record is a forest of figures bewildering in meticulous but unconvincing detail. With the High Court's figure of Rupees 42,993-4-2 now accepted by the appellants as the measure of their deceased father's liability, this part of the case has ceased to be formidable. An analysis of the figure, a composite one, is however still necessary in order to ascertain to what extent it is a liability for which the appellants can be made responsible. Upon this, the only question now at issue, the relevant facts have emerged with great clearness as a result of the elaborate judgments delivered by the learned Judges in India, and their Lordships are thereby enabled to state with comparative brevity their relatively simple findings upon which the decision of the appeal must depend.
(3.) In March 1915, the Government of India granted to the School Committee the sum of Rs. 90,000 for additions to and alterations of the school buildings. The grant was made on conditions, one of which was that the money, pending its final application, should be placed on deposit with the Bank of Bengal. As to Rs. 30,000 part of this grant, no trace, it appears, exists. Rs. 60,000, treated as representing the entire grant, is found in the hands of Thakur Dhianpal Singh in June 1916, and after being placed by him on fixed deposit for one year, it was on 15 August 1917 invested in War Loan repayable in three years. On repayment, Rs. 50,000 was, on 19 August 1920, placed by Thakur Dhianpal Singh on deposit with the Bank of Bengal, and Rs. 10,000 on current account in each case in his own name. On 16 October 1920, he reported to the Committee the repayment of the War Loan arid proceeded as follows: "I have consequently invested a sum of Rs. 50,000 in fixed deposit with the Bank of Bengal at 4 per cent per annum for one year, and Rs. 10,000 in a current call account. I request the formal sanction of the Committee. I further beg that the Committee may be pleased to authorise me to operate on the Account and draw the money, when necessary, to meet the "expenses of the brick kiln and the acquisition of other building materials."