Divij Kumar Quits CMS INDUSLAW for Independent Practice
03 Mar 2026
Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
ST Members Can Invoke Section 13B HMA If Hinduised By Customs: Chhattisgarh High Court
06 Mar 2026
Rajasthan HC Flags Near-Zero Cut-Off for Teachers
06 Mar 2026
Lease Cancellation Valid Even by 'In-Charge' Mining Officer Under OMMC Rules: Orissa High Court
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Smt. Jaibun Nisha – Appellant
Versus
Mohd. Sikandar – Respondent
2026:CGHC:5625 SOURABH BHILWAR AFR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2026.02.03
11:00:44 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SA No. 195 of 2016 Judgment reserved on 28/01/2026 Judgment delivered on 02/02/2026 Smt. Jaibun Nisha Wd/o Late Abdul Sattar Lodhiya, Aged About 64 Years R/o Rani Road, Purani Basti Korba, Tahsil And Distt. Korba, Chhattisgarh .......Plaintiff ... Appellant versus
1 - Mohd. Sikandar S/o Gulam Mustafa, Aged About 27 Years R/o Main Road, Urga, Tahsil And Distt. Korba, Chhattisgarh
2 - The State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The District Collector, Korba, Chhattisgarh ........Defendants ... Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate For Resp. No. 1 : Ms. Meera Ansari, Advocate along with Mr. Aman Ansari, Advocate For State/Resp. No. 2: Mr. Anand Gupta, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge
C A V Judgment
1. The presen
Point of Law : Section 100 of CPC provides that, (1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in body of this Code or by any other law for time being in force, an appeal shall lie to High Court from ever....
Inheritance rights under Mohammedan Law are individual, arising only upon death, eliminating claims of joint family property made prematurely based on shared assumptions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Mohammedan Law principles, specifically regarding the validity of a gift deed and the exceptions to the requirement of transfer ....
Implied consent to a bequest under Mohammedan Law cannot be inferred from silence or inaction; it must be established through affirmative acts.
Under Mahomedan Law, an heir's right to property arises only upon the ancestor's death, thus a challenge to a gift deed executed during the ancestor's lifetime lacks cause of action.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article