Skip to content


Rajarathna Vadugunatha Pillai Vs. Srinivasa Raghava Ayyangar and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Revn. Petn. No. 845 of 1948
Judge
Reported inAIR1951Mad278; (1950)2MLJ378
ActsCourt-fees Act, 1870 - Sections 7
AppellantRajarathna Vadugunatha Pillai
RespondentSrinivasa Raghava Ayyangar and ors.
Appellant AdvocateN. Rajagopala Iyengar, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateK.V. Ramachandra Iyer, Govt. Pleader, ;T.S. Venkatarama Iyer and ;S.V. Venugopalachari, Advs.
DispositionRevision dismissed
Cases ReferredHussain Sahib v. Ayesha Bibi
Excerpt:
- .....sanction is impeached on the ground of fraud and collusion would not make any difference. it would utmost be in the event of fraud being established in a case where no sanction was obtained for the transfer. the view taken by the lower court regarding the transaction is correct, the minor was a party to the decree through a guardian. he is, therefore, bound to sue to set aside the decree, and the court-fee directed to be paid under section 7(iv-a), court fees act. the civil revision petition is dismissed with coats.
Judgment:
ORDER

Satyanarayana Rao, J.

1. The decision of the lower Court is correct. The Pull Bench in Hussain Sahib v. Ayesha Bibi, I. L. K. (1941) Mad. 775 : A. I. R. 1911 Mad. 431 decided that a quondam minor impeaching an alienation made by a certificated guardian without sanction of the Court is bound to sue to set aside the sale. This is not a case where the minor avoided the transaction by anything done before suit. He chose the institution of the suit as the only mode of avoidance and he is bound to include in the plaint a prayer for setting aside the transaction. The fact that the sanction is impeached on the ground of fraud and collusion would not make any difference. It would utmost be in the event of fraud being established in a case where no sanction was obtained for the transfer. The view taken by the lower Court regarding the transaction is correct, The minor was a party to the decree through a guardian. He is, therefore, bound to sue to set aside the decree, and the court-fee directed to be paid under Section 7(iv-A), Court fees Act. The civil revision petition is dismissed with coats.


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