Lakshmanan Chetty v. Lakshmanan Chettiar

This is an appeal from an order of the Subordinate Judge of Ramnad rejecting a plaint filed by the next friend of a minor on the ground that the suit was not instituted in the interests of the minor. A preliminary objection has been taken that there is no appeal as the order does not amount to a decree under section 2, read with Order 7, Rule 11, Civil Procedure Code. It has been held in Beni Ram Bhutt v. Ram Lal Dhukri that an appeal lies and we are not prepared to differ from that decision.

For the appellants it is objected that the Court had no jurisdiction to reject the plaint on this ground and that the utmost it could do was to remove the next friend under the provisions of Order 32, Civil Procedure Code, We are unable to agree with this contention. Order 32, Civil Procedure Code does not purport to be exhaustive, and does not deal with the case of a suit being filed contrary to the interests of the minor. The passage cited from Simpson on Infants, page 383, citing Fox v. Swercrop and other cases, shows that the Court has jurisdiction in a proper case to dismiss a suit filed by a next friend on the ground that it is not in the interests of the minor that the suit should be allowed to go on. In the present case the next friend is heavily indebted to the minor and in the opinion of the Subordinate Judge has instituted the present proceedings with a view to avoid payment of his indebtedness. There appear to be good grounds for this conclusion, and we are not prepared to interfere with the discretion which has bean exercised by the Subordinate Judge who has gone into the matter very carefully.

The appeal is dismissed with costs, payable by the next friend. The Civil Revision petition is dismissed.Appeal and Revision

Petition dismissed.