Skip to content


Velayudham Pillai and anr. Vs. Perumal Naicker and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty;Limitation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in31Ind.Cas.811
AppellantVelayudham Pillai and anr.
RespondentPerumal Naicker and anr.
Cases ReferredSivavadevelu Pillay v. Ponnammal
Excerpt:
minor - mother executing mortgage of minor's property--document not purporting to be executed by mother as guardian--property described as belonging to minor and registered in mother's name as guardian--construction of deed--suit by minor to set aside mortgage-deed--limitation act (ix of 1908), schedule i, article 44. - .....the guardian of her minor son) that that document was executed by her in her capacity as guardian of her son, though she is not so described in the body of the document. the case of kamakshi nayakan v. ramasami nayakan 7 m.l.j. 131 quoted by the appellants counsel has been dissented from in sivavadevelu pillay v. ponnammal 15 ind. cas. 365 : 22 m.l.j. 404 : 11 m.l.t. 198 : (1912) m.w.n. 383, and we have no doubt that article. 44 of the limitation act applies to this suit and that it was rightly held barred by the district court. the second appeal is dismissed with costs.
Judgment:

1. Following Hanoomanpersaud Panday v. Musammat Babooee Munraj Koonweree 6 M.I.A. 393 : 18 W.R. 81n. : Sevestre 253n : 2 Suth. P.C.J. 29 : 1 Sar. P.C.J. 552 : 19 E.R. 147. and Murari v. Tayana 20 B.P 286 we hold (especially having in view the description of the mortgaged property in Exhibit I as having been registered in the name of the mother as the guardian of her minor son) that that document was executed by her in her capacity as guardian of her son, though she is not so described in the body of the document. The case of Kamakshi Nayakan v. Ramasami Nayakan 7 M.L.J. 131 quoted by the appellants Counsel has been dissented from in Sivavadevelu Pillay v. Ponnammal 15 Ind. Cas. 365 : 22 M.L.J. 404 : 11 M.L.T. 198 : (1912) M.W.N. 383, and we have no doubt that Article. 44 of the Limitation Act applies to this suit and that it was rightly held barred by the District Court. The second appeal is dismissed with costs.


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