Page images
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

Rc. Cet. 27, 1700.

CONTENTS FOR JANUARY.

Purgash Rai, (Plaintiff), Appellant, versus Sheogobind,

tewarree, (Defendant), Respondent. Claim, to set

aside a sale of certain shares of an Estate, on the

grounds that, according to Hindoo Law, the seller

could not legally alienate the property. Lower

Court's dismissal of claim, as barred by lapse of time,

upheld, the argument of the appellant, that a condi-

tional sale is an incomplete transaction, and cannot

constitute a ground of action until the sale has

become absolute, being rejected, it being held that

the cause of action must be considered to have

arisen at the time of the transfer, the rendering of

the sale absolute being a mere consequence depending

upon the original transfer, and not a separate trans-

action by itself,

Balmokund, (Defendant), Appellant, versus Baboo Jankee

Dass, (Plaintiff), Respondent. Claim, laid in the

Zillah Court of Benares, to bring to sale certain

rights and interests in land situated in the district of

Mirzapore, which was decreed by the Zillah Court,

but reversed in appeal, it being held that the

suit was only cognizable in the Court of the Zillah in

which the property was situated, and in which the

defendant, as purchaser of the disputed property, is

resident,

Hurnam Rai and others, (Defendants), Appellants, versus

Bishumbur Rai and others, (Plaintiffs), Respondents.

Remanded, the decisions of the lower Court being
held to be incomplete and defective, as the plea of
champerty, advanced in those Courts by the defend-
ants, was left unadjusted,

Mewa Ram, (Defendant), Appellant, versus Rajah Teekum

Singh, (Plaintiff), Respondent. Plaintiff, as taloo-

quadar, sues for reversal of sale on account of arrears

of revenue, on ground that the parties held no pro-

Pages.

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
« PreviousContinue »