Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

It is right to follow the rule of law, where it is held an infant is as much bound by a judgment in his own action as if of full age; and this rule is general, unless gross laches, or fraud and collusion appear in the prochein ami, then the infant might open it by a new bill.

9. The learned Judge after that referred to the practice in the Chancery Court that if it were sought to question a decree passed against a minor on the ground of fraud or collusion, this might be done by an original bill. If it were sought to impeach a decree on the ground of gross negligence that the next friend had omitted to put forward proper or available grounds of defence, this was usually done by re-opening the original case upon motion or petition. It was then observed that in this country the procedure was different. If the infant desired to have a decree set aside on the ground that his next friend neglected his interests, the proper mode of procedure would be to apply for review under the Civil Procedure Code; but if he wanted to have it set aside by a separate suit, he can proceed only on grounds of fraud or collusion. The other learned Judge did not discuss this point but simply said that as there was no fraud proved, the decree and the execution were good and the plaintiff was out of Court as he could not reach the property without setting aside the sale. As I read the facts of this case, the plaintiff attempted to have the decree and the execution sale vacated, not on the ground of any culpable negligence on the part of the guardian but only on grounds of fraud and collusion. In the opinion of the High Court he failed to establish his case. The observation of Field J. was therefore in the nature of an obiter. It would be noticed however that in the opinion of the learned Judge the minor had a remedy even when there was gross laches on the part of the next friend, but the remedy, according to him, lay by way of an application for review of judgment under the Civil Procedure Code.