Decided on July 27,1901



Robertson, J - (1.) This litigation between the appellant and the respondents has lasted for fifteen years; it has increased in volume and complexity as it proceeded in the devious courses recorded in the printed book and yet the essential facts are not of unusual complication. It would be unprofitable to recite all the stories, true and false, which have gathered round the transactions of the two brothers, Khurshed and Asghar, and it is only necessary at first to ascertain what were the relations of the one to the other out of which the disputes have arisen.
(2.) First of all then, in 1875, the uncle of the two brothers, Husain Ali Khan, paid to the elder of them, Khurshed, the sum of Rs. 74,800, being the amount due to the two as their share of the profits of estates which their father and Husain, and afterwards the two brothers and Husain, had held jointly. From 1875 there was separation between Husain and the two brothers, but the two brothers remained joint in all their estate until 1882 and in business until the present dispute arose. Before speaking however, of the relations between the two brothers as to estate and business generally it is convenient to complete the narrative of the Rs. 74,800 which came from the uncle into the hands of Khurshed. In a case abounding in mutual accusations of forgery and perjury, the main facts about this money are undisputed. That the greater part of it, viz. Rs. 60,000 was deposited in the Bank of Upper India and the rest, viz. Ra. 14,800, with two native firms of bankers at Meerut is certain. The sequel as to Rs. 60,000 needs only to be told briefly in order to its being dismissed from further consideration. It was given by Khurshed to the other respondent, Muzaffar, his son, but as Khurshed admits his liability to account for it, the whole history of Muzaffar's dealings with it has no further relation to the present dispute. There was a dispute as to what became of the Rs. 14,800, but this is the sole controversial survival of the subject-matter of the first suit; viz. the Rs. 74,800 which came to the brothers from their uncle Husain, and it is ultimately dealt with in the account.
(3.) Turning now to the general relations between the two brothers the facts are simple. They were joint in estate (as has already been said); they owned consider able property in the district of Muzaffarnagar; both were in Government service, employed in different districts, and one was at home at one time and another was at another. It resulted from these mutual relations and similar engagements, that the one acted for the other in the receipt of the profits of their estate, and when necessary for more important matters, powers-of-attorney were granted by the one to the other. This is common ground and the fierce controversies in this suit are as to which brother in certain specified cases collected moneys belonging to both. In 1882 the greater part of the landed property belonging to them was divided between them; but they continued joint in other matters; and the growing distrust between the two did not produce an actual rupture until the litigation began in 1885.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.