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

1923 Supreme(All) 375

KANHAIYA LAL
Rukka – Appellant
Versus
Chhiddu – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Kanhaiya Lal, J. - There is no force in this appeal. Musammat Kausilya was a Malin by caste. She was first married to Behari in one of the approved forms. That fact was admitted. On the death of Behari she was married to Bidhi. On her death there were two sets of claimants to her stridhan. One set comprised Chhiddu and Bidhi who are brothers of Behari. The other set comprised the sister of Musammat Kausilya and the husband of that sister and the husbands of certain other deceased sisters. The latter have clearly no title Chhiddu and Bidhi were entitled, to the stridkan of Musammat Kausilya by reason of her marriage to Behari in one of the, approved forms. The second marriage does not affect the right to which the plaintiffs became entitled by virtue of the first marriage. The appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed with costs including in this Court fees on the higher scale.

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