LAWS(PVC)-1925-1-175

BHAGWATI DAYAL Vs. MUSAMMAT DHAN KUNWAR

Decided On January 18, 1925
BHAGWATI DAYAL Appellant
V/S
MUSAMMAT DHAN KUNWAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application by Bhagwati Dayal for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council in consequenee of the reversal by this Court of the decision of the Subordinate Judge, who allowed a compromise between the parties.

(2.) The plaintiff brought a suit on the allegation that he had been adopted in 1916 by Musammat Dhan Kunwar, a defendant, under a verbal authority given by her deceased husband, Salig Ram. Another defendant who was impleaded was Ajudhia Prasad, he having obtained a mortgage on some of Salig Ram's property. After both the defendants had filed separate written statements denying the alleged adoption the parties were said to have come to a compromise, which was evidenced by a document, dated the 6 of August 1923, registered on the 8 of August. In the ordinary course the Subordinate Judge issued a commission for verification of the deed by the pardanashin lady, Musammat Dhan Kunwar, and she denied any knowledge of the compromise or having put her thumb-impression upon any document evidencing an agreement by which the suit was to be brought to a close. She set up that if it were in fact her thumb-impression on the document, that it might have been obtained from her during a period of illness. The learned Subordinate Judge thereupon inquired into the question, took evidence on both sides, and came to the opinion that in point of fact the lady had entered into the compromise well knowing it to be the compromise of the suit and having adequate and proper advice and protection from people who surrounded her. The learned Subordinate Judge, therefore, passed a decree in the terms of the compromise.

(3.) From that order by which the compromise was to be recorded the lady appealed, and a Bench of this Court came to the conclusion that although in fact the thumb-impression was that of the lady, the document was not fully explained to her, that she did not understand its nature, nor had she independent advice, and thereupon they set aside the order of the learned Subordinate Judge.