Skip to content


Prosanna Kumar Saha Vs. Dhirendra Lal Gupta - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in123Ind.Cas.320
AppellantProsanna Kumar Saha
RespondentDhirendra Lal Gupta
Excerpt:
bengal court of wards act (ix of 1879), section 60a - appointment of court of wards as common manager--co-sharers, whether become wards--right to alienate, whether extinguished. - .....the court of wards act in holding that the interest of the judgment-debtor in the property attached is not saleable. section 60 a, however, refers to debts incurred by a ward. the judgement-debtor in this case is not a ward of court. the court of wards was appointed the common manager under the provisions of the bengal tenancy act by the district judge. that does not render all the co-sharers of the property wards of court so as to disqualify them from incurring debts or selling their interest in the property in question. as every co-sharer is entitled to sell his interest, a 'creditor of such co sharer is entitled to sell his property in execution of his decree against him.2. the order of the subordinate judge is set aside and the case remitted to the court below for proceeding with.....
Judgment:

1. In this case the order of the Subordinate Judge appears to us to be wrong. He has applied the provisions of Section 60 A of the Court of Wards Act in holding that the interest of the judgment-debtor in the property attached is not saleable. Section 60 A, however, refers to debts incurred by a ward. The judgement-debtor in this case is not a Ward of Court. The Court of Wards was appointed the common manager under the provisions of the Bengal Tenancy Act by the District Judge. That does not render all the co-sharers of the property wards of Court so as to disqualify them from incurring debts or selling their interest in the property in question. As every co-sharer is entitled to sell his interest, a 'creditor of such co sharer is entitled to sell his property in execution of his decree against him.

2. The order of the Subordinate Judge is set aside and the case remitted to the Court below for proceeding with the execution. The appellant is entitled to his costs as against the respondent, which we assess at five gold mohurs.


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