Skip to content


Ramiengar, Minor by Next Friend, A. Rangasawmy Iyengar and Vs. the Secretary of State for India in Council, Represented by the Collector of Chingleput - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectFamily
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in4Ind.Cas.105
AppellantRamiengar, Minor by Next Friend, A. Rangasawmy Iyengar and ;vedantachariar, Minor by Next Friend, A.
RespondentThe Secretary of State for India in Council, Represented by the Collector of Chingleput
Excerpt:
hindu law - debts--debts of father--fine--costs decreed to be paid by father as next friend of his minor son for bringing a vexatious suit--liability of son to pay father's debt. - - the liability to pay costs was clearly imposed as a penalty for his misconduct and the debt thus incurred is tainted with immorality and the sons are not bound to pay......misconduct and the debt thus incurred is tainted with immorality and the sons are not bound to pay. again under hindu law, among debts which sons are not bound to pay are fines (see mayne's hindu law, 7th edition, page 389), and in this case the liability imposed upon the appellant's father may also be regarded as in the nature of a fine.2. we, therefore, allow these appeals, and give the plaintiffs decree as prayed for with costs throughout.
Judgment:

1. The father of the appellants in these two appeals brought a suit in forma pauperis as next friend of one of the appellants to establish his adoption and recover possession of property. The alleged adoption was found to be false, the suit was dismissed and the father of the appellants was directed under Section 440, Civil Procedure Code, to pay the costs due to Government. Now the reason why the appellant's father was made liable for the costs was that he had been guilty of what was certainly an immoral act in bringing a suit which he must have known to be false. The liability to pay costs was clearly imposed as a penalty for his misconduct and the debt thus incurred is tainted with immorality and the sons are not bound to pay. Again under Hindu Law, among debts which sons are not bound to pay are fines (see Mayne's Hindu Law, 7th Edition, page 389), and in this case the liability imposed upon the appellant's father may also be regarded as in the nature of a fine.

2. We, therefore, allow these appeals, and give the plaintiffs decree as prayed for with costs throughout.


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