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.

Rukka and ors. Vs. Chhiddu and ors.

Rukka and ors. vs Chhiddu and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Nov 26, 1923
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/477155

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
Allahabad
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Hindu Law - Stridhan--Deceased husband's brothers, right of--Second marriage, effect of. - - 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.

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rukka and ors.

Respondent

Chhiddu and ors.

Legal References

Reported In
84Ind.Cas.522

Excerpt

hindu law - stridhan--deceased husband's brothers, right of--second marriage, effect of. - - 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.kanhaiya lal, j.1. 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.

Full Judgment

Kanhaiya Lal, J.

1. 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.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial