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

1910 Supreme(All) 58

BANERJI, JOHN STANLEY
Gajadhar Pande – Appellant
Versus
Musammat Parbati – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. In the suit out of which this appeal has arisen the plaintiffs claimed possession of shares in two villages as reversionary heirs of one Mulai Pande. They also claimed mesne profits. The property in dispute with other' property belonged to one Ajudhia deceased. He left three sons Pargash, Mulai and Hardayal. Before his death he divided his property between these three sons and it is a matter not now in controversy that the three sons were separated Hindus. Mulai accordingly at the time of his death was entitled as a separated Hindu to his share. He had a son named Janki who predeceased him leaving a widow Musammat Katwari Kunwar. He also left two widows, namely, Musammat Hansrani and Musammat Sitla Kunwar. The last of these widows died in 1889. A plea of limitation was set up by the defendants, and this plea was decided in their favour by the learned Subordinate Judge upon the ground that 12 years had elapsed before the institution of the suit from the death of Musammat Katwari.

2. It appears to us that in the circumstances of the case, the time of the death of Musammat Katwari is immaterial inasmuch as her husband predeceased his father and she, therefore, acquired no in

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