PRIVY COUNCIL

(FROM CALCUTTA.)

Before:-Lords Buckmaster, Dunedin And Shaw And Sir John Edge.

D/d. 19.4.1921.

Gobinda Chandra Pal (alunatic) and others, Convicts - Appellants

Versus

Kailash Chandra Pal and others - Respondents

For the Appellant :- Dube, Advocate.

For the Respondent :- Raikes, Advocate.

Solicitors for Respondents :- TL Wilson and Co.

Solicitors for Appellants :- Barroiv, Rogers and Neville.

Case Referred :-

Sakinbai v. Shrnibai, AIR 1920 PC 60: 47 IA 88 : 11 LW 486 : 18 ALJ 499 : 22 Bom LR 552 : 38 MLJ 431 : (1920) MWN 311(PC).

JUDGMENT

Lord Buckmaster :- Their Lordships are unable to entertain this petition and regret that a procedure should have-been adopted by the High Court which will delay the ultimate judgment and; increase the expense. In truth, their Lordships are not in a position to decide; whether the terms of compromise which they are asked to sanction are beneficial to the parties who are under a disability, nor can Counsel who appeared before them give them the requisite assurance that they have been able to investigate all material matters, and that the Board can safely act in making the desired order.

2. All such questions are essentially and necessarily the proper subject for consideration of the Courts in India, who are in a position to institute the enquiries, to ask the questions, and to obtain the information which must always be required before sanctioning proceedings on behalf of people who are unable to assent for themselves. In rare cases it may be possible that this could be done here, and in their Lordships' desire to avoid the multiplication or prolongation of proceedings, they may occasionally accept the burden, as was done in the case of Sakinbai v. Shrnibai AIR 1920 PC 60: 47 IA 88 : 11 LW 486 : 18 ALJ 499 : 22 Bom LR 552 : 38 MLJ 431 : (1920) MWN 311(PC), but this is not the regular and usual course, and in this case they are unable to adopt it.

3. In all cases where it is desired to bind persons under disability by a compromise, it is of the utmost importance that there should be a clear expression of opinion by the proper Court in India that such compromise is a beneficial one for those persons.

4. The petition must stand over until the proper certificate has been obtained from the High Court.

Case adjourned.