Privy Council(1930) 06 PRI CK 0004

Ram Harakh and others vs Hanwant Ram

Privy Council · Decided on 26 June 1930 · Citation: (1930) AIR(PC) 249

HON’BLE JUDGES
Binod Mitter, Gerorge Lowndes, John Wallis, Viscount Dunedin, JJ.
CASE NUMBER
Privy Council Appeal No. 28 of 1928

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 140 words

Viscount Dunedin, J.

Their Lordships see no reason to differ from the unanimous judgment of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner affirming the judgment of the Court below. They think it is quite clear that these parties had complete notice of the existence of the charge in question, and as far as estoppel is concerned it is impossible to hold that something done by the respondent, Raja Hanwant Ram, as representative of his brother, is to create an estoppel on what is a personal claim by himself by a perfectly different arrangement and having nothing to do with the brother''s debts.

Therefore their Lordships will humbly advise His Majesty that the appeal ought to be dismissed.

The appellants must pay such small costs as have been incurred in the appeal by the representatives of the Court of Wards who appeared.