9911796707
TMI Blog1933 (2) TMI 10X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Lal, witness, should be re-examined and he has been re-examined. Now we proceed to decide the remaining issues. Issue No. 1. The evidence of Shiam Lal now clearly establishes that Jagmohan Ram signed the memorandum of association as a promoter and made himself liable for 151 shares of the value of Rs. 100 each. Shiam Lal swore that he attested the memorandum of association in the presence of the executant, Jagmohan Ram. It was argued that this evidence was not enough and that Shiam Lal ought to have said specifically that he was present when Jagmohan Ram made his signature and that Jagmohan was present when Shiam Lal signed the document as a witness. In our opinion the statement made by the witness makes this clear, and if this was not c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ind out how far the share of Ram Lakhan in the joint family property is liable to pay Jagmohan Ram's debt. The relevant proposition of Hindu Law, when fully stated, would stand as follows: A son is liable to pay his father's debt out of the family property consisting of his own share and the share of the father, the property which was in the father's hand in the life-time of the father. It is not a complete statement of the law to say, that a Hindu son is bound to pay his father's debt because of a pious obligation to that effect. If that were the whole proposition of law, the son would be liable to pay out of his personal earnings, which however is not the law. The doctrine of pious obligation was invented to settle a conflict between tw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here the family consists not only of the father and the sons, but of brothers of the father, the position becomes entirely different. Then it is no longer a case of a father at the head of his family, and incurring debts on the credit of family property. It is then a case of a debt incurred by one of the members of a Hindu family. If the person who has incurred the debt be the manager of the family, he can bind the family only if he has incurred the debt for the benefit of the family. If he be not the manager, he cannot bind the family in any circumstances. If there is no benefit to the family, the debt can be realised, in the case of a simple money decree being passed on it, by attachment of the share of the debtor in his life-time. If an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... some extent unsettled the law as it was previously understood. In one sense, therefore, the propositions laid down by their Lordships were mostly obiter dicta but in view of the fact that their Lordships did mean to settle the entire law, we must accept their pronouncement as conclusive for us. At page 104 their Lordships considered the several aspects that could arise in a Hindu family. The first case that their Lordships considered was the case of a joint family which was managed by one of the members. The law that was laid down was that the managing coparcener could neither alienate the family property nor burden the estate in his capacity as a manager except for purposes of necessity. It is important to note that their Lordships lai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case of a family consisting of a father and sons, but it was a case in which there were members of the family other than sons. The case before us not being covered by proposition No. 2 of their Lordships, and being covered by proposition No. 1, the liability of Ram Lakhan will be only to the extent of the separate of self-acquired property (which did not merge in the joint family estate) in the hands of Ram Lakhan. We accordingly decide that the liability of Ram Lakhan is only to the extent of the property to which Section 160 of the Indian Companies Act applies, namely, the separate property of Jagmohan Ram in which no other person had any interest in the life-time of Jagmohan Ram. Issue No. 5 does not require any decision in the cir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anies Act which says that the subscribers of the memorandum of company "shall be deemed to have agreed to become members of the company." This section has been interpreted in several cases in this Court and other courts and it has been held that the words "shall be deemed to have agreed to become members of the company" mean that the subscribers of the memorandum of a company are to be treated as having become members of the company by the fact of the subscription. This view was taken in In the matter of the Union Bank, Allahabad, and in the case of the Official Liquidator of J. H. Chandler and Co. v. H. I. Phillips. No decided case in conflict with these authorities has been produced before us and we hold that by merely subscribing t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
