A Kasturi Ranga Aiyar
v.
Venkatarama Aiyar
(High Court Of Judicature At Madras)
No. | 10-03-1914
52. The fact that the son died subsequently and that execution is now sought against his heir and legal representative does not, in our opinion, in any way, affect the operation of Section 53 or make the property in question any less the father s property for the purposes of Sections 50 and
52. We agree with the learned Judge and dismiss the appeal with costs.
Advocates List
For the Appearing Parties ----
For Petitioner
- Shekhar Naphade
- Mahesh Agrawal
- Tarun Dua
For Respondent
- S. Vani
- B. Sunita Rao
- Sushil Kumar Pathak
Bench List
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WALLIS
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AYLING
Eq Citation
1914 MWN 354
24 IND. CAS. 280
AIR 1914 MAD 668 2
LQ/MadHC/1914/119
HeadNote
Debt, Torts & Specified Offences — Hindu Succession Act, 1956 — Ss. 50, 52 and 53 — Decree against assets of deceased in hands of his legal representative — Execution of decree against legal representative of legal representative — Validity of — Whether ancestral property of father which passed by survivorship to son, deemed to be property of deceased father which had come to hands of son as his legal representative — Held, unless debt was incurred for immoral or illegal purposes, ancestral property of father which passed by survivorship to son was by S. 53, deemed to be property of deceased father which had come to hands of son as his legal representative, that is to say, as soon as it got into son's hands after father's death it became father's property for purposes of Ss. 50 and 52 — Fact that son died subsequently and that execution is now sought against his heir and legal representative does not, in any way, affect operation of S. 53 or make property in question any less father's property for purposes of Ss. 50 and 52 — Execution of decree against legal representative of legal representative of deceased — Validity of