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

1904 Supreme(Cal) 156

FRANCIS W. MACLEAN, PRINSEP, HARINGTON, GHOSE, BRETT
Arip Mandal – Appellant
Versus
Ram Ratan Mandal – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Francis W. Maclean, C.J. - In our opinion, irrespective of custom or local usage, the heir of an under-raiyat under an annual holding as entitled, on the death of the under-raiyat, to remain in possession of the land, until the end of the agricultural year, for the purpose, if the land has been sublet, of realising the rent which might accrue during the year, or if not sublet, for the purpose of tending and gathering in the crops. In this case the suit was not brought until after the expiration of the then agricultural year. Although there was a claim for mesne profits, there is no evidence whatever to show that there wore any, or that there were any crops which had been sown by the plaintiff's predecessor. The result, therefore, is that there is nothing which he can claim in this suit; and the suit must be dismissed.

2. The appellant is entitled to his costs in the two lower Courts, but to no costs of this Appeal.

Prinsep, J.

3. I am of the same opinion.

Ghose, J.

4. I agree.

Harington, J.

5. I agree.

Brett, J.

6. I agree.

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