Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

NasiruddIn HusaIn Vs. Ashfaq Husain

NasiruddIn Husain vs Ashfaq Husain

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Jun 26, 1918
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/468966

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Allahabad
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Civil

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Civil Procedure Code (Act V of 1908), Section 115, Order XXXII Rule 2 - Revision--Plaint, proper presentation of--Plaint filed by minor without next friend--Election to proceed after attaining majority. -

Key legal issue
Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

NasiruddIn Husain

Respondent

Ashfaq Husain

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1918All71; 46Ind.Cas.747

Excerpt

civil procedure code (act v of 1908), section 115, order xxxii rule 2 - revision--plaint, proper presentation of--plaint filed by minor without next friend--election to proceed after attaining majority. - .....the plaintiff himself in which the plaintiff stated that he was not a minor on the date of the filing of the plaint, that in any case he had completed his age of twenty-one years and that he wished to proceed with the plaint. thereupon the court ordered the plaint to be registered and issued notice of the suit to the other side. an application was made on behalf of the defendants to have the plaint taken off the file on the ground that the suit had been instituted by a minor without a next friend. this application was granted and the court ordered the plaint to be taken off the file. against this order the present application for revision has been brought. in our opinion there was an irregular presentation of the plaint on the 3rd of march 1917 and that the plaint was lying in the court without its being registered from that date to the 15th of march. on the 15th of march the plaintiff elected to proceed with the plaint, and we must take it that there was a proper presentation of the plaint on that date. it was upon that application that the court ordered it to be registered. this being so, we must hold that the plaint was properly presented on the 15th of march when the plaintiff was of full age, and, therefore, there was no justification for the order directing the plaint to be taken off the file. the court in making that order refused to exercise the jurisdiction which was vested in it. we allow the application, set aside the order of the court below and direct it to take back the plaint as instituted on the 15th of march 1917 and proceed to hear the suit according to law. under the circumstances we direct that the parties do abide their own costs of the application.

Full Judgment

1. The facts of the case out of which this application arises are these. On the 3rd of March 1917 a plaint was filed in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Meerut. The office reported that the plaintiff would attain majority on the 5th of March 1917 and that the suit had been instituted by a minor without a next friend. The Court ordered the plaint to be brought forward in the presence of the pleader for the plaintiff and fixed a date for that purpose. On the 15 of March 1917 an application was filed signed both by the pleader for the plaintiff and the plaintiff himself in which the plaintiff stated that he was not a minor on the date of the filing of the plaint, that in any case he had completed his age of twenty-one years and that he wished to proceed with the plaint. Thereupon the Court ordered the plaint to be registered and issued notice of the suit to the other side. An application was made on behalf of the defendants to have the plaint taken off the file on the ground that the suit had been instituted by a minor without a next friend. This application was granted and the Court ordered the plaint to be taken off the file. Against this order the present application for revision has been brought. In our opinion there was an irregular presentation of the plaint on the 3rd of March 1917 and that the plaint was lying in the Court without its being registered from that date to the 15th of March. On the 15th of March the plaintiff elected to proceed with the plaint, and we must take it that there was a proper presentation of the plaint on that date. It was upon that application that the Court ordered it to be registered. This being so, we must hold that the plaint was properly presented on the 15th of March when the plaintiff was of full age, and, therefore, there was no justification for the order directing the plaint to be taken off the file. The Court in making that order refused to exercise the jurisdiction which was vested in it. We allow the application, set aside the order of the Court below and direct it to take back the plaint as instituted on the 15th of March 1917 and proceed to hear the suit according to law. Under the circumstances we direct that the parties do abide their own costs of the application.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial