direction of the Governor-General in Council or a Local Government, in the name of an agent or in any other кате, and nothing in sections 442 to 462 applies to any minor or person of unsound mind, for whose person or property a guardian or manager has been appointed by the Court of Wards or by the Civil Court under any local law.

This section applies to H. C. and P. S. C. C.

The following section has been substituted by section 53, Act VIII of 1890.

Princes and Chiefs

464. Nothing in this Chapter applies to a Sovereign Prince or ruling Chief suing or being sued and Wards of Court. in the name of his State or being sued, by direction of the Governor-General in Council or a Local Government, in the name of an agent or in any other name, or shall be construed to affect, or in any way derogate from, the provisions of any local law for the time being in force relating to suits by or against minors or by or against lunatics or other persons of unsound mind.

Court of Wards.-Where a suit was brought by a manager under the Court of Wards on behalf of a ward, and it was objected that he had no authority to sue, the Privy Council considered the objection merely formal and refused to hear it--Hurdey Narain vs. Pundit, L. R., 11 Ind. App., 26. See also Beresford vs. Ramasubba, I. L. R., 13 Mad., 197; Sanku vs. Puttamma, I. L. R., 14 Mad., 289; but see Bhoopendro Narain vs. Baroda Prosad, I. L. R., 18 Cal., 500; Kumar vs. Kumar, 17 Ind. App., 7; Dinesh, Chunder vs. Golam Mostapha, I. L. R., 16 Cal., 89.

As to where a suit on behalf of a ward has been properly instituted by sanction not obtained, see Biseswar Roy vs. Shoshi Sikar, I. L. R., 17 Cal., 688.

Local Law.-See note under section 440, ante-Guru Churn vs. Kali Kishen, I. L. R., 11 Cal., 402.

CHAPTER XXXII.

SUITS BY AND AGAINST MILITARY MEN.

465. When any officer or soldier actually serving the Government in a military capacity is a

Officers or soldiers

leave may authorize

any person to sue or

who cannot obtain party to a suit, and cannot obtain leave of absence for the purpose of prosecuting or defending the suit in person, he may authorize any person to sue or defend in his stead.

defend for them.

The authority shall be in writing and shall be signed by the officer or soldier in the presence of (a) his commanding officer, or the next subordinate officer, if the party be himself the commanding officer, or (b) where the officer or soldier is serving in military staff employment, the head or other superior officer of the office in which he is employed. Such commanding or other officer shall countersign the authority, which shall be filed in Court.

When so filed the countersignature shall be sufficient proof that the authority was duly executed, and that the officer or soldier by whom it was granted could not obtain leave of absence for the purpose of prosecuting or defending the suit in person.

Explanation. In this Chapter the expression "commanding officer" means the officer in actual command for the time being of any regiment, corps, detachment or depôt to which the officer or soldier belongs.

Act VIII of 1859, section 19. This section applies to H. C. and P. S. C. C.

As to jurisdiction to try an action brought against a soldier, see Mahomed Saib vs. Aggas, I. L. R., 10 Mad., 319.

The written authority must be filed in the suit; and where the objection was taken in regular and special appeal, it was held the defect could not be cured and suit was dismissed-Sheoram Vithal vs. Bhagirathebhai, 6 Bom., 20.

Person so authorized may act personally or appoint pleader.

466. Any person authorized by an officer or a soldier to prosecute or defend a suit in his stead may prosecute or defend it in person in the same manner as the officer or soldier could do if present; or he may appoint a pleader to prosecute or defend the suit on behalf of such officer or soldier.

Act VIII of 1859, section 20. This section applies to H. C. and P. S. C. C.

Service on person so authorized, or on his pleader, to be good service.

467. Processes served upon any person authorized by an officer or a soldier, as in section 465, or upon any pleader appointed as aforesaid by such person to act for, or on behalf of, such officer or soldier, shall be as effectual as if they had been served on the party in person or on his pleader.

Act VIII of 1859, section 20. This section applies to H. C. and P. S. C. C.

468. When an officer or a soldier is a defendant, the Court shall send a copy of the summons to his commanding officer for the purpose o

Service on officers and soldiers.

being served on him.

The officer to whom such copy is sent, after causing it to be served on the person to whom it is addressed, if practicable, shall return it to the Court with the written acknowledgment of such person endorsed thereon.

If from any cause the copy cannot be so served, it shall be returned to the Court by which it was sent, with informa tion of the cause which has prevented the service.

Act VIII of 1859, section 62. This section applies to H. C. and P. S. C. C. A copy of a summons was sent to Secunderabad by post to the commanding officer where the defendant was stationed, and it was returned with the defendant's acknowledg

ment endorsed on it and with a certificate that it had been duly served, but there was no affidavit of service: Held, that service was sufficiently proved-Harrison vs. Hope, 11 B. L. R., App. 43.

Causing it to be Served.-The commanding officer must serve--Mahomed Saib vs. Aggas, I. L. R., 10 Mad., 319.

Execution of warrant of arrest in cantonments, &c.

469. If, in the execution of a decree, a warrant of arrest or other process is to be executed within the limits of a cantonment, garrison, military station or military bazar, the officer charged with the execution of such warrant or other process shall deliver the same to the commanding officer.

The commanding officer shall back the warrant or other process with his signature, and, in the case of a warrant of arrest, if the person named therein is within the limits of his command, shall cause him to be arrested and delivered to the officer so charged.

Act VII of 1859, section 259. This section applies to H. C. and P. S. C. C.

The civil pay of a non-commissioned officer in civil employ can be made available in execution-Cohen vs. McCarthy, 14 W. R., 441.

CHAPTER XXXIII.

INTERPLEADER.

470. When two or more persons claim adversely to one another the When interpleadersame payment or property suit may be instituted. from another person, whose only interest therein is that of a mere stakeholder and who is ready to render it to the right owner, such stakeholder may institute a suit of interpleader against all the claimants for the purpose of obtaining a decision as to whom the payment or property should be made or delivered, and of obtaining indemnity for himself:

Provided that if any suit is pending in which the rights of all parties can properly be decided, the stakeholder shall not institute a suit of interpleader.

This section applies to H. C. and P. S. C. C.

A right of lien is not an interest in the property-Attenborough vs. St. Katharine's Dock Company, 3 C. P. D., 450.

An interpleader-suit may be instituted when two or more persons advance claims bona fide-Re New Hamburg and Brazilian Railway, W. N., 1875, p. 239; if their claims refer to the same property and to the same extent-Hoggart vs. Cults, Cr. & P., 197 (though this case has been disapproved of in India-The Secretary of State vs. Mir Muhammud, 1 Mad., 361; Manvel vs. Shanghai Bank, I. L. R., 14 Bom., 489; see also Attenborough vs. St. Katharine's Dock Company, 3 C. P. D., 450) against a person in possession-Burnett vs. Anderson, 1 Mer., 405, who claims no interest himself, but is merely a stakeholder-Prudential Assurance Co. vs. Thomas, 3 Ch. App., 74; so that no question can arise between him and the claimants-Bignold vs. Audand, 11 Sm., 23; and who is ready to deliver it to the right owner, whether their titles have had a common origin or are independent of each other-Tanner vs. The European Bank, 1 Ex., 261;

or their claims have or have not a substantial foundation-E. & W. India Dock Co. vs. Littledale, 7 Ha., 59. It is not necessary that the stakeholder should have been sued-Re New Hamburg and Brazilian Railway, W. N., 1875, p. 239.

In execution of a decree against B, the bailiff A seized certain goods which were released on C paying, under protest, the sum mentioned in the warrant. A paid the money into the warrant office: Held, C's remedy was not by interpleading, but suing for money had and received-Cohen vs. Mullick, 1 Gasper, 139.

Parties.--See Smith vs. Darlow, 26 C. D., 605.

When a suit has been brought against a person before instituting the interpleadersuit, he should endeavour to have the other claimants made parties under section 32, ante, so as to have the whole question disposed of in the one suit. But see Mahomed Badshah vs. Nicol, I. L. R., 4 Cal., 355; Naraini Kuar vs. Durjan, I. L. R., 2 Alla., 738, and notes under section 32, ante.

471. In every suit of interpleader the plaint must, in addition to the other statements necessary Plaint in such suit. for plaints, state

(a) that the plantiff has no interest in the thing claimed otherwise than as a mere stakeholder;

(b) the claims made by the defendants severally; and

(c) that there is no collusion between the plaintiff and any of the defendants.

This section applies to H. C. and P. S. C. C.

No suit will lie if the plaintiff claims an interest in the property-Mitchell vs. Hayne, 2 S. & S., 63; or disputes the amount--Heploch vs. Hammond, 2 Sm. & G., 141; or has handed over the property to one claimant on an indemnity-Burnett vs. Anderson, 1 Mer., 405. The plaintiff must also, if possible, bring the subject of the contention into Court before any order can be passed. See next section.

472. When the thing claimed is capable of being paid. thing into Court or placed in the custody of the Court, the plaintiff must so pay or place it

Payment of claimed into Court.

before he can be entitled to any order in the suit.

This section applies to H. C. and P. S. C. C.

Procedure at first hearing.

473. At the first hearing the Court

may

(a) declare that the plaintiff is discharged from all liability to the defendants in respect of the thing claimed, award him his costs, and dismiss him from the suit;

or, if it thinks that justice or convenience so require,

(b) retain all parties until the final disposal of the suit; and, if it finds that the admissions of the parties or other evidence enable it,

may

(c) adjudicate the title to the thing claimed: or else it

(d) direct the defendants to interplead one another by filing statements and entering into evidence for the purpose of bringing their respective claims before the Court, and shall adjudicate on such claims.

When agent and

474. Nothing in this Chapter shall be taken to enable agents to sue their principals, or tenants tenants may institute to sue their landlords, for the purpose of compelling them to interplead with any persons other than persons making claim through such principals or landlords.

interpleader-suits.

Illustrations.

(a) A deposits a box of jewels with B as his agent. C alleges that the jewels were wrongfully obtained from him by A, and claims them from B. B cannot institute an interpleader-suit against A and C.

(b) A deposits a box of jewels with B as his agent. He then writes to C for the purpose of making the jewels a security for a debt due from himself to C. A afterwards alleges that C's debt is satisfied, and C alleges the contrary. Both claim the jewels from B. B may institute an interpleader-suit against A and C.

This section applies to H. C. and P. S. C. C.

An agent or tenant cannot ordinarily dispute the title of his principal or landlord, and hence he is not allowed to institute an interpleader-suit. But if a landlord has created a subsequent intermediate tenure, or the agent is not certain who his principal is, a suit will lie-Clarke vs. Byne, 13 Ves., 383; Stuart vs. Welch, 4 My. & C., 305.

475. When the suit is properly instituted, the Court Charge of plaintiff's may provide for the plaintiff's costs by giving him a charge on the thing claimed or in some other effectual way.

costs.

This section applies to H. C. and P. S. C. C.

The plaintiff is, as a rule, entitled to be paid at once his costs out of the fund in Court-Glynn vs. Locke, 3 D. & War., 11, 24; or to a charge upon it--(section 475); and the losing defendant must make good the amount-Laing vs. Zeden, 9 Ch. App., 738.

Procedure where defendant is suing stakeholder.

476. If any of the defendants in an interpleader-suit is actually suing the stakeholder in respect of the subject of such suit, the Court in which the suit against the stakeholder is pending shall, on being duly informed by the Court which passed the decree in the interpleader-suit in favour of the stakeholder, that such decree has been passed, stay the proceedings as against him; and his costs in the suit so stayed may be provided for in such suit; but if, and so far as, they are not provided for in that suit, they may be added to his costs incurred in the interpleader-suit.

Costs.

This section applies to H. C. and P. S. C. C.

Under the 30 and 31 Vict., c. 142, s. 31, the Judge has power to adjudicate in an interpleader-suit upon any special damages to which the claimant of the goods seized may be entitled, arising out of the execution, and no separate suit will lie-Death vs. Harrison, 6 Ex., 15. This is not the law in India, see Walmrey vs. Cartner, 1 Gasper, 170.