SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1933 Supreme(SC) 49

Nizam Din and others – Appellant
Versus
Godar and others – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
C.J. Colombos, Begum Farruki, Zafarulla Khan

Sir John Wallis:-

The only question in this appeal is whether in 1891 or 1892 one Gharib, who was then sub-mortgagee in possession of the suit lands and is now represented by the defendants, acquired the equity of redemption which was then vested in the plaintiffs as sons of the deceased mortgagor. The defendants set up this purchase in answer to the claim for redemption in the present suit filed by the plaintiffs in 1920, and the Subordinate Judge of Lahore holding that there were no sufficient reasons for questioning the sale, dismissed the suit. This decree was reversed by the High Court of Lahore, and the defendants have appealed.

As Gharib and his descendants, the present defendants, have been recorded as proprietors of the suit lands ever since 1893 in the annual jamabandi statements, and were also so recorded in the village record of rights prepared after the settlement of 1911-12, a statutory presumption arises under S. 44, Punjab Land Revenue Act (17 of 1887), that the aforesaid entries are correct. They were admittedly based on an order in the mutation register signed by the Revenue Assistant, and dated 4th February 1892, in which it is stated that the plaintiffs had appear













Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top