Mortgage decree against Hindu father - Sale of joint family property - Sale not binding on sons - Suit for possession by sons - it is not necessary for him to have the sale set aside

Citation

AIR 1954 MADRAS 961

FULL BENCH

MADRAS HIGH COURT

(Principal Seat at MADRAS)

SUBBA RAO , J. and PANCHAPAKESA AYYAR , J. and N. RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR , J.

Appeal No. 619 of 1948, (against decree of Sub-J., Nilgiris at Ootacamund, D/- 14 -8 -1947.) D/-22 - 2 - 1954

Abdul Hameed Sait and another Appellants v. The Provident Investment Co. Ltd. and others Respondents

(A) Hindu Law - Debts - Son's liability - Decree against father - Sale in execution of mortgage decree - Binding effect on son.

(B)Limitation Act (9 of 1908), Art.12(a), Art.142, Art.144 - Mortgage decree against Hindu

father - Sale of joint family property - Sale not binding on sons - Suit for possession by sons -

Limitation. Hindu Law - Debts - Son's liability - Extent of.

The terms of Article 12 itself indicate that it applies only to a case where the court sale is required to

be set aside before the plaintiff can ask for any relief in respect of the property covered by that sale.

 (Para 83) 

A suit by a person who was not a party to the suit or the sale proceedings, to recover possession of

his property, which was erroneously sold as the property of another person is not governed by Art.

12(a) as the sale could not affect the title of the plaintiff and, therefore, it is not necessary for him

to have the sale set aside.