https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189214 The Supreme Court, in a majority decision, dismissed the appeals and upheld the validity of the compromise decrees. It held that Section 56 of the U.P. Court of Wards Act, 1912, is directory, not mandatory, and failure to appoint representatives did not nullify the decrees. The Court of Wards had the authority to settle disputes without separate representatives. Justice Subba Rao dissented, deeming Section 56 mandatory and the decrees null due to non-compliance. He argued for separate representatives for each ward. en-us Mon, 14 Dec 1959 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Dec 2016 15:57:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189214 The Supreme Court, in a majority decision, dismissed the appeals and upheld the validity of the compromise decrees. It held that Section 56 of the U.P. Court of Wards Act, 1912, is directory, not mandatory, and failure to appoint representatives did not nullify the decrees. The Court of Wards had the authority to settle disputes without separate representatives. Justice Subba Rao dissented, deeming Section 56 mandatory and the decrees null due to non-compliance. He argued for separate representatives for each ward. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 14 Dec 1959 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189214