WANCHOO, MODI
Kishanlal – Appellant
Versus
Sohanlal – Respondent
2. We may give a brief history of this litigation as that will help in understanding the questions involved in these appeals. One Ganesh was the jagirdar of village Malpuria. He died sometime in 1931, and a dispute arose as to the succession of his jagir. Two sets of claimants appeared on the scene. One set consisted of Mohanlal alone who claimed that he was entitled to the jagir of Malpuria on the ground that he was the adopted son of Ganesh. The other set consisted of Sohanlal and others who contended that Mohanlal was not entitled to the jagir on the ground that he was not in the line of the Murisala, and that they were entitled to the jagir as collaterals being in he line of Murisala These disputes were considered by the Revenue Minister of the former State of Marwar, and he ordered on the 15th of March, 1934, that the two parties should get their claims determined by a civil court. In the meantime, the jagir remained under the management of the State.
3. Thereupon,
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.