A a Hindu claiming as the heir of his uncle sues the executors of his uncle rsquo s widow for proper...........

Civil Procedure Code (CPC) 1908 Execution

A, a Hindu, claiming as the heir of his uncle, sues the executors of his uncle’s widow for property left by the widow, alleging that the same belonged to the estate of his uncle, and that the widow had no power to dispose it off by will. The court holds that the widow had power to do away the property under the will.

A will not be allowed to amend the paint by adding that even if the widow had the power to dispose of the property by her will

A was entitled to the residue as his uncle’s heir as the same was left to charitable objects of an unspecified and general character, and could not, therefore, be legally applied to charity

Both (A) and (B)

None of these

छोटे Courses बड़े Results

Master Execution

Prepare through Micro-courses

Try Now

Explanation:

- In the scenario, A sues as heir claiming the widow had no right to dispose of property by will.

- If the court finds the widow *did* have such power, can A change his case (amend the plaint) now to argue he still inherits on another ground (that the charitable bequest is too vague)?

- Option 1: Says A cannot amend the plaint to make an alternative claim based on the vague charitable bequest.

- Option 2: Says A can argue he inherits the residue because the charity named is too unclear to be legally valid.

- Option 3: Combines both above.

- Option 4: Says neither is correct.

Correct Answer: Option 1

- The principle is, if a party originally founds their claim on one basis (e.g., widow lacked testamentary power), but the court finds against them, they cannot shift stance and claim on a wholly different footing (e.g., vagueness of charitable intention)—unless such a plea was raised in the plaint.

- Since A did not plead this second point originally, the court generally does not allow such amendment after judgment on the initial ground.