Kali Bakhsh Singh vs Ram Gopal Singh on 27 November, 1913
684 and Kali Bakhsh Singh v. Ram Gopal Singh [1913] 36 All. 81. In the former case we find the following passage at p. 91: "Then comes the question, was the deed executed under such circumstances that it ought not to be allowed to stand? Duress and coercion may be laid out of consideration. The witnesses who speak to anything of that kind were discredited by both Courts. But there remains the more subtle form of undue influence. Their Lordships desire not to say a word which could interfere with the settled principles on which the Court acts in considering the deeds of Pardanashin ladies or could tend to lessen the protection which it is the duty of the Court to throw around those who are unable to protect themselves. They do not forget that this lady was a Pardanashin lady. They do not forget that at the time of the execution of the deed she was living in more than ordinary seclusion; that she was in very deep distress; and that she was surrounded by members of that branch of the family to which the objects of her bounty more immediately belonged. But bearing all these things in mind, and reviewing the whole evidence, they come to the conclusion that the lady knew perfectly well what she was doing, and that in every sense the act was her own act."