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.

Vasudeva Bhatlu Vs. Narasamma

Vasudeva Bhatlu vs Narasamma

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Feb 02, 1882
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/773690

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
Chennai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Property

Case Summary

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

Hindu Law - Sale complete without possession--Evidence Act, Section 92(4). -

Key legal issue
Property

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Vasudeva Bhatlu

Respondent

Narasamma

Legal References

Reported In
(1882)ILR5Mad6

Excerpt

hindu law - sale complete without possession--evidence act, section 92(4). - 1. we requested the district judge to find whether the sale was complete, and what was the consideration for it.2. he has found that the consideration was a valuable consideration, and that the sale was not complete only by reason of possession not having been delivered.3. we have already decided that, under the law current in madras, possession was not necessary to complete a sale. the cases upon this point will be found noticed in mr. mayne's work on hindu law and usage, paragraphs 330-334.4. the provisions of the evidence act, section 92, to which the district judge refers, do not prohibit the disproof of a recital in a contract as to the consideration that has passed by showing that the actual consideration was something different to that alleged.5. as the sale was complete, the plaintiff had a right to recover the lands, and we must reverse the decree of the district judge and restore that of the district munsif with costs.

Full Judgment

1. We requested the District Judge to find whether the sale was complete, and what was the consideration for it.

2. He has found that the consideration was a valuable consideration, and that the sale was not complete only by reason of possession not having been delivered.

3. We have already decided that, under the law current in Madras, possession was not necessary to complete a sale. The cases upon this point will be found noticed in Mr. Mayne's work on Hindu Law and Usage, paragraphs 330-334.

4. The provisions of the Evidence Act, Section 92, to which the District Judge refers, do not prohibit the disproof of a recital in a contract as to the consideration that has passed by showing that the actual consideration was something different to that alleged.

5. As the sale was complete, the plaintiff had a right to recover the lands, and we must reverse the decree of the District Judge and restore that of the District Munsif with costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial