Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a suit instituted against the proprietor of a proprietary concern after his death could sustain a valid decree and whether such decree was executable by invoking Order XXX Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Analysis: A proprietary concern is not a juristic entity distinct from its proprietor; a suit by or against such concern is in substance a suit by or against the proprietor. If the proprietor had already died before institution of the suit, the real person against whom the claim lay was no longer in existence, and only the legal representatives could be proceeded against. Order XXX Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 extends the applicability of Order XXX to proprietary concerns only insofar as the nature of the case permits, and it does not convert a proprietary concern into a partnership firm or justify application of Order XXX Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to a dead proprietor.
Conclusion: The decree passed against the deceased proprietor was a nullity and could not be executed; the objection in execution was rightly upheld.
Ratio Decidendi: A suit instituted against a deceased proprietor of a proprietary concern is a suit against a non-existent person, and Order XXX Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 does not authorise execution of a decree so obtained by treating the concern as if it were a partnership firm.