Reduction of a disposition, whereupon infeftment has followed, may be sued by the heir served in general, though not infeft, where the reasons are idiotry, minority, or death-bed.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Janet Meikle as heir general, served and retoured to John Meikle her brother, pursues reduction of a disposition of a tenement of land, and certain other lands made by the defunct to Patrick Liston, with the infeftment following thereupon; upon this reason, that he was furious or idiot, the time of the disposition, before and ever since during his life-time. It was alleged, That a general service could not furnish a title for an action of reduction, being to take away a real right and infeftment; and therefore, unless the pursuer were infeft, there could be no process. It was answered, That the allegeance ought to be repelled, because the pursuer could not be legally infeft upon a retour, until the infeftment granted to Liston were reduced; because the defunct non obiit ultimo vestitus et sasitus, being denuded by the infeftment granted to Liston; and therefore, properly that infeftment should be first reduced, to the end that the pursuer may be habili modo infeft upon the retour; just as if a general heir were pursuing a deed and infeftment to be reduced as done in lecto ægritudinis, or an heir of a minor upon minority.
