9911796707
TMI Blog1949 (12) TMI 39X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ht. 2. The circumstances giving rise to the appeal are these. On 21st September 1935, an application was made by the sons and grand-sons of one Gauri Shankar under S. 4, United Provinces Encumbered Estates Act, to the Sub Divisional Officer, Faridpur, district Bareilly. It was forwarded, under S. 6 of the Act, to the Special Judge on 23rd September 1935. The applicants filed a list of debts due by them and also a list of the properties owned by them which comprised two items only. On 20th August 1936, a supplementary list of properties as belonging to them was filed by the debtors and it was said that the omission to mention these in the original list was due to a mistake. These properties were roughly of the value of ₹ 70,00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in view of two decisions of their Lordships of the Privy Council in Sahodra v. Ram Babu 1943 A.L.J. 271 : (A.I.R 1943 P.C. 10) and Mst. Besar Kuar v. Bishundeo Singh, A.I.R 1943 P.C. 184 : (I.L.R. (1944) Kar. P.C. 14), where they held that for the purposes of the Hindu Law of Inheritance (Amendment) Act, 1929, a half sister had the same rights as a full sister. In the result Mst. Jamna Kuer's appeal was allowed and it was declared that she was entitled to the properties left by Kunj Behari. 5. In the concluding portion of the judgment the learned Judges made a specific declaration to the effect that Jamna Kuer was entitled to 2= biswas zamindari of village Kaman, the cash certificates and the nine shares of the District Co-oper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d, that the result of the appeal should have been a decision that all the property entered in the written statement of 20th August 1936, belonged to Mt. Jamna Kuar as she was the heiress of Kunj Behari Lal fend the applicants under S. 4 were not. Unfortunately on the date we decided the appeal Mr. P.M. Verma himself did not understand the case of his client in fall and no representative of his client enlightened him. Consequently be was not able to show us that all the properties in the written statement of 20th August, 1936 had been admitted by the applicants in the Encumbered Estates Act proceeding to have belonged to Kunj Behari Lal and that by the amendment of the claim of Mt. Jamna Kuer (i.e., the addition of para. 15), Met. Jamna Kuer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... related to the estate of Kunj Behari and that so far as the debtors were concerned, they were owners of only two properties mentioned in the gazette notification. In this situation it would have been appropriate if the High Court had corrected this error on the review petition and saved the appellant the trouble and expense of an appeal to the Privy Council or to this Court. Whether the error occurred by reason of the counsel's mistake or it crept in by reason of an oversight on the part of the Court was not a circumstance which could affect the exercise of jurisdiction of the Court to review its decision. We have no doubt that the error was apparent on the face of the record and in our opinion the question as to how the error occurred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
