BHONDU MAL Vs. THOMAS SKINNER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the defendant Lala Bhondu Mal against whom the plaintiff's suit for a declaration that the preliminary decrees in suits Nos. 74 and 75 of 1927 of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Meerut, dated 21 April 1928, and the final decrees, dated 14 December 1929, Lala Bhondulal Mal V/s. Amir Mirza and Ors., are null and void and ineffectual as against the plaintiff, has been decreed by the trial Court. It appears that Lala Bhondu Mal brought two suits, Nos. 74 and 75 of 1927, against several persons on the basis of certain mortgage- deeds. The defendants to those suits-were the heirs of the original mortgagor, and Thomas Skinner, the plaintiff in the present suit, who was impleaded as a subsequent pre-emptor of a portion of the mortgaged property. The suits were decreed; preliminary decrees were passed on 21 April 1928 and final decrees were-passed on 14 December 1929.

(2.) Thomas Skinner instituted the present, suit on 13 April 1931 with Mr. James-Skinner as his next friend. The allegation was that Thomas -Skinner was of unsound mind and by reason of such unsoundness and mental infirmity was incapable of protecting his interests at the time when the above-mentioned suits were instituted by Lala Bhondu Mal, and as no one was appointed his guardian during the pendency of the suits, the decrees obtained by Lala Bhondu Mai were mere nullities-It has been found by the Court below that Thomas Skinner was a lunatic and of unsound mind when the former suits were instituted, and on that finding the plaintiff's suit has been decreed.

(3.) In appeal before us it is contended that, the finding of the Court below on the question as to whether the plaintiff was of unsound mind in 1927, when the suits were instituted, is not supported by the evidence on the record. Our attention has been drawn to the fact that Thomas Skinner instituted a suit against one Bhullu on 2nd. September 1927 without a next friend, that another suit was instituted against him Suit No. 100 of 1927 Bank of Upper India V/s. Thomas Skinner and Ors. without the appointment of any guardian for Thomas Skinner, that another decree was obtained by Thomas Skinner against Nasi Khan and others on the basis of a suit instituted on 25 April 1928 without the appointment of any next friend and that on 16 August 1928 Thomas Skinner executed a sale-deed in favour of Robert Hercules Skinner, presumably as a person of sane mind, because there is nothing either in the indenture of the sale-deed or in the registration endorsement to show that anybody acted on behalf of Thomas Skinner. Over and above this, it is pointed out that in suits Nos. 74 and 75 of 1927 a written statement was filed on behalf of Thomas Skinner bearing the latter's signature and a vakalatnama was also executed by him. Prom these circumstances it is argued that Thomas Skinner was capable of protecting his interests and was not of unsound mind at the time when Lala Bhondu Mal instituted suits Nos. 74 and 75 of 1927. As against this evidence, we have the statement of Lt. Col. Overbeck-Wright and Dr. Mitter who say that Mr. Thomas Skinner was suffering from chronic mania prior to the year 1926, and that this mental condition has been continuing up till the present time. Both of them depose that it was unlikely that Mr. Thomas Skinner had any periods of lucid interval. We also know that in March 1926 Thomas Skinner was admitted in a lunatic asylum on the certificates of two medical practitioners and remained there till 1 December 1926 when he was discharged on sureties being offered by some of his relations, but he had to be admitted again on 24 September 1929, and Thomas Skinner is there even now.