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

1955 Supreme(Raj) 231

WANCHOO, DAVE, MODI
Thakur Sheokaran Singh – Appellant
Versus
Daulatram – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Chandmal, for Appellant; Hastimal, for Respondent

Wanchoo, C. J.—The following question has been referred to this Full Bench for reply;—

"Whether the rule of Damdupat as recognised by Hindu Law, in the absence of any statute, is of binding force and/or can be given effect to in this State?"

2. We may briefly refer to the circumstances in which this question has arisen. A suit was filed by Daulatram and others against Thakur Sheokaransingh for recovery of a sum of Rs. 18,500/-. In that connection, the question arose whether the plaintiffs were entitled to the amount that they claimed in the face of the principle of Damdupat which was aside to be in force in the former State of Marwar. The question came up before a Division Bench of this Court which has made this reference to a Full Bench, as the point is of considerable importance and is likely to arise in many cases, and it was thought desirable that the law should be laid down authoritatively.

3. The question, that has been put to us for answer, may be broken up into two parts. In the first place, we have to decide whether the principle of Damdubat was in force in the former State of Marwar. Then comes the next question whether, even if it be that the principle was in force, it can


























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