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

1936 Supreme(SC) 54

Binda Kuer and others – Appellant
Versus
Lalita Prasad Choudhary and others – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S. Hyam, J. Chinna Durai, Dunne

Sir George Rankin:-

These are two consolidated appeals brought by the plaintiffs whose suit was decreed by the Subordinate Judge of Muzaffarpur on 16th August 1928, but was dismissed by two decrees of the High Court of Patna on 14th December 1932. The plaintiffs claimed declaration of their title to, and a decree for possession of, a half share of the properties referred to in the plaint as having belonged to one Bajrangi Lal, who died in 1861, and whose widow, Mt. Amola Kuer, died in 1916. The plaintiffs' case was that they, together with defendant 63, were entitled to half, and that defendants 1 and 2 and the husband of defendant 3 were entitled to the other half. A number of other persons were impleaded as purchasers from the widow of different items of her husband's property, but both Courts in India have negatived the pleas of legal necessity and the purchaser respondents can make no higher case than those respondents who are members of the family. Their Lordships will use the expression "the defendants" as comprising the latter class only.

From the pedigree, it will be seen that the common ancestor of plaintiffs and defendants was one Madari Lal. He had five sons, Hanuman, Bhai















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