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

1927 Supreme(Cal) 139

ROY, B. B. GHOSE
Mt. Rukeya Banu – Appellant
Versus
Mt. Nazira Banu – Respondent


JUDGMENT

B.B. Ghose, J. - These two appeals arise out of a single suit for partition which has been dismissed by the learned Subordinate Judge. Appeal 175 of 1925 is by defendants 4 and 14 to 17. The contesting respondents are defendants 1, 8, 11, 18, 34 and 66. The representatives of defendants 13 and 27, as well as defendant 6, appear in this Court by their guardian ad litem, the Deputy Registrar. These respondents support the appeal made by the appellants. Appeal 261 of 1925 is by the plaintiff. Defendant 1, who appears as one of the respondents, resists this appeal. There is one common ground between the two appeals, and there are certain different grounds in the appeal preferred by the plaintiff which will be dealt with separately. The property in question originally belonged to the ancestor of the parties, a gentleman named Syed Bakht Majumdar. He created a wakf of some of his properties by a deed, dated the 28th August 1867.

2. The plaintiff asked for partition of the properties comprised in that document in her plaint, and the defendants, who are appellants in appeal 175 of 1925, and the other defendants who also support the plaintiff's suit for partition, also asked for part

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