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

1983 Supreme(Guj) 34

A.P.RAVANI, V.V.BEDARKAR
IBRAHIM SHAH MOHAMAD – Appellant
Versus
NOOR AHMED NOOR MOHAMED – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: G.P.Vyas, P.V.Nanavati

V. V. BEDARKAR, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal involves point about an oral gift made by a Mahomedan and also an oral will. Some of the donees and legatees are actual heirs under the Mahomedan law while the one i. e. the plaintiff who has filed the suit is not.

( 2 ) THE suit property belonged to one Shah Mohmed Noor Mohmed. He had four secs. (1) Ibrahim (appellant no. 1) (2) Usman (appellant no. 2) (3) Noor Mohmed (respondent no. 1s father who died during the life time of Shah Mohmed) and (4) Ismail. He had also one daughter named Kulsumbibi (appellant no. 3 ).

( 3 ) PLAINTIFF Noor Ahmed Noor Mohmed filed Civil Suit no. 3615 of 1973 on the ground that his grand father Shah Mohmed had made an oral gift for some properties which are mentioned in Schedule A to the plaint in favour of three appellants and respondent no. 1 (plaintiff ). This oral gift is alleged to have been made on 1-4-1953. It was also his case that before going on pilgrimage to Mecca his grandfather also made an oral will in favour of all the four pertaining to the remaining immoveable properties. The trial Court did not believe the case of the plaintiff about oral will pertaining to properties mentioned in Schedule B and henc




















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