Skip to content


Lallu Bhagvan Vs. Tribhuvan Motiram Deceased by His Sons and Heirs Lallu and Narbheram - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectFamily
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1889)ILR13Bom653
AppellantLallu Bhagvan
RespondentTribhuvan Motiram Deceased by His Sons and Heirs Lallu and Narbheram
Excerpt:
hindu law - son's liability for father's debts--decree against legal representatives of a deceased debtor-assets. - maharashtra scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, de-notified tribes (vimukta jatis), nomadic tribes, other backward classes and special backward category (regulation of issuance and verification of) caste certificate act (23 of 2001), sections 6 & 10: [s.b. mhase, a.p. deshpande & p.b. varale, jj] caste certificate petitioner seeking appointment against the post reserved for member of schedule tribe his caste certificate was invalidated subsequently held, his appointment would not be protected. the observations/directions issued by supreme court in para 36 of judgment in the case of state v millind reported in 2001 91) mah. lj sc 1 is not the law declared by supreme court.....jardine, j.1. we are of opinion that this case should have been decided in favour of plaintiff, although the deceased debtor may have left no assets. as remarked in bapuji v. umedhbhai, a decree ought to have been made against defendants as representatives of their father, whether they had inherited any property or not. if they had had no property, the only result would have been that the decree could not have been executed against them. for these reasons, we reverse the decree of the small cause court, and decree for the amount claimed, against the defendants as legal representatives, to be paid out of the property of deceased defendants to pay costs in the suit.
Judgment:

Jardine, J.

1. We are of opinion that this case should have been decided in favour of plaintiff, although the deceased debtor may have left no assets. As remarked in Bapuji v. Umedhbhai, a decree ought to have been made against defendants as representatives of their father, whether they had inherited any property or not. If they had had no property, the only result would have been that the decree could not have been executed against them. For these reasons, we reverse the decree of the Small Cause Court, and decree for the amount claimed, against the defendants as legal representatives, to be paid out of the property of deceased Defendants to pay costs in the suit.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //