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

MANOHER PERSHAD
Riyasatunnisa Begum – Appellant
Versus
Syed Tahwar Hussain Khan – Respondent


JUDGMENT :

1. These are two miscellaneous appeals one on behalf of Riyasatunnissa Begum and the other on behalf of Izzatunnissa Begum alias Azizunnissa Begum, against the order of the first Judge, City Civil Court, d. 4-3-1955 refusing to pass a decree in terms of the compromise. These appeals arise out of suits filed by Riyasatunnissa Begum and Tahwar Hussain Khan. During the pendency of the suits. Riyasatunnissa Begum and Tahwar Hussain Khan and other sons of the late Nawab Kamal Yar Jung entered into a compromise.

In both these suits, they filed separate compromise petitions requesting the court to pass a decree in terms of the compromise. The Court below has refused to pass a decree in terms of the compromise on the ground that the liability acknowledged by the parties to the compromise is not personal, but is attached to the matruka and unless it is determined as to how much matruka is in the possession of Riysatunnissa Begum no decree could be passed.

2. The learned counsel for the appellants argued that the court below has erred in holding that no decree in terms of the compromise could be passed at that stage. Relying on the cases of Surendra Nath Mitra v. Tarubala Das1, La

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