Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Thakur Anant Singh Vs. Thakur Durga Singh

Thakur Anant Singh vs Thakur Durga Singh

Disposition Appeal dismissed Court Mumbai Decided May 07, 1910
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/331342

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Mumbai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Civil
Disposition
Appeal dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Evidence-Custom-Wajib-ul-arzes-Their value as evidence-Instance, evidence of an.;;;That where, from internal evidence, it seemed probable that the entries recorded in Wajib-ul-arzes connoted the views of individuals as to the practice that they would wish to see prevailing rather than the ascertained fact of a well-...

Key legal issue
Civil
Outcome / disposition
Appeal dismissed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Thakur Anant Singh

Respondent

Thakur Durga Singh

Legal References

Reported In
(1910)12BOMLR504

Excerpt

evidence-custom-wajib-ul-arzes-their value as evidence-instance, evidence of an.;;;that where, from internal evidence, it seemed probable that the entries recorded in wajib-ul-arzes connoted the views of individuals as to the practice that they would wish to see prevailing rather than the ascertained fact of a well-established custom, the appellate court in india in holding that the custom was not proved properly attached weight to the fact that no evidence at all was forthcoming of any instance in which the custom sought to be established by-such entries was proved. - - ratan singh died in 1899, leaving certain shares in the deokaha estate, as well as some house property. 36 indap 125, and where, as here, from internal evidence, it seems probable that the entries recorded connote the views of individuals as the practice that they would wish to see prevailing rather than the ascertained fact of a well-established custom the learned judicial commissioners properly attached weight to the fact that no evidence at all was forthcoming of any instance in which the alleged custom had been observed......and held that the succeession passed to the brother of the whole blood, the now respondent, alone. the learned judicial commissioners, in their lordships' opinion, gave excellant reasons for refusing to regard the evidence adduced by the plaintiff as sufficient to establish such a special custom in the family as to rebut the ordinary presumption that the mitakshara law prevailed. it has been pointed out more than once at this board that there is no class of evidence that is more likely to vary in value according to circumstances than that of the wajib-ul-arzes (muhammad imam ali khan v. sardar husain khan and musammat parbati kunwar v. rani chandarpal kunwar (1909) l.r. 36 indap 125, and where, as here, from internal evidence, it seems probable that the entries recorded connote the views of individuals as the practice that they would wish to see prevailing rather than the ascertained fact of a well-established custom the learned judicial commissioners properly attached weight to the fact that no evidence at all was forthcoming of any instance in which the alleged custom had been observed. the question involved was one of fact only, and their lordships see no reason whatever to differ from the opinion of the learned judicial commissioners.2. their lordships will humbly advise his majesty that the appeal be dismissed with costs.

Full Judgment

Collins, J.

1. The question on this appeal is as to the right of a step-brother in a Hindu family to share equally with a brother of the whole blood in the succession of a deceased brother. Ratan Singh died in 1899, leaving certain shares in the Deokaha estate, as well as some house property. He was succeeded by his widow, who died in April, 1903. On her death the appellant Anant Singh, his stepbrother, claimed to be equally entitled with Dunga Singh, his sole surviving brother of the whole blood, to share in his succession. His contention was upheld by the Subordinate Judge, but on appeal the learned Judicial Commissioners overruled his decision and held that the succeession passed to the brother of the whole blood, the now respondent, alone. The learned Judicial Commissioners, in their Lordships' opinion, gave excellant reasons for refusing to regard the evidence adduced by the plaintiff as sufficient to establish such a special custom in the family as to rebut the ordinary presumption that the Mitakshara Law prevailed. It has been pointed out more than once at this Board that there is no class of evidence that is more likely to vary in value according to Circumstances than that of the Wajib-ul-arzes (Muhammad Imam Ali Khan v. Sardar Husain Khan and Musammat Parbati Kunwar v. Rani Chandarpal Kunwar (1909) L.R. 36 IndAp 125, and where, as here, from internal evidence, it seems probable that the entries recorded connote the views of individuals as the practice that they would wish to see prevailing rather than the ascertained fact of a well-established custom the learned Judicial Commissioners properly attached weight to the fact that no evidence at all was forthcoming of any instance in which the alleged custom had been observed. The question involved was one of fact only, and their Lordships see no reason whatever to differ from the opinion of the learned Judicial Commissioners.

2. Their Lordships will humbly advise His Majesty that the appeal be dismissed with costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial