W.G Roslin v. H.B. Maryhamy – SLR – sllr 1994 volume 3 page 262

In the case between the Plaintiff‐Respondent and the 7th Defendant‐Petitioner, the court examined whether a settlement entered into during partition proceedings—without proper representation or consent of the 7th Defendant—could legitimately bind her interests. The central legal issues included the improper reduction of the 7th Defendant’s entitlement to land, suppression of material evidence concerning deed No. 4192, and the exercise of revisionary jurisdiction in addressing procedural irregularities leading to a miscarriage of justice. It was determined that the proceedings were fundamentally flawed as the 7th Defendant, despite holding deeds that established entitlement to 18 1/2 perches, was unrepresented, not properly informed, and did not consent to the settlement that reduced her sh