A CRACKNELL Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
LAWS(ALL)-1952-4-10
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on April 02,1952

A.CRACKNELL Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Bind Basni Prasad, J. - (1.) This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution by one Mrs. A. Cracknell directed against the State of Uttar Pradesh, the Collector of Meerut and the Court of Wards arising under the following circumstances.
(2.) The petitioner is the owner of what was formerly known as Dasna estate comprising of about twenty three thousand bighas in the district of Meerut spread over nine villages. Her complaint is that "without any notice, warning or any opportunity to show cause, and without any hearing or any reference of any kind whatsoever to the petitioner, the Court of Wards, at the instance of the Collector, Meerut, assumed superintendence of her estate on the morning of 5th September, 1951." The notification dated 10-9-1951 published in the U. P. Gazette dated 15-9-1951 in Part I-A at page 601 shows that the superintendence of the estate has been taken over under Clause (b) of Sub-section (1) of Section 8, U. P. Court of Wards Act, 1912. The petitioner's suggestion is that her mother Mrs. A Coppinger is against her, as she wanted the petitioner to be her "unpaid companion, house-keeper and manager" and was opposed to the petitioner's marriage to anyone, and when the petitioner married, the relations between the two became strained and she turned against the petitioner's husband also, "who, to her way of thinking was the cause of the deprivation of the comfort and the personal services of the petitioner in her old age." There has been litigation between the mother on the one hand and the daughter and son-in-law on the other and it is suggested that the Collector was friendly with the mother.
(3.) The reliefs claimed are: "(i) a direction, order, or writ, in the nature of a writ of certiorari be issued against the opposite parties requiring them to produce the records of the proceedings relating to the petitioner's estate and after perusal thereof the proceedings and orders of the opposite parties be quashed; (ii) an interim direction, order or writ be issued against the opposite parties requiring them to restore the management of the petitioner's estate to her in the meanwhile.";


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