Kolkata Court November 1970 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Mst. Mabiya Khatun Bibi Vs. Shaikh Anwar Ali
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-12-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal218,75CWN216
P.N. Mookerjee, J. 1. The only point, arising in this Letters Patent Ap-peal is to the effect whether a Mohamedan wife, who has left the husband voluntarily and has refused to come back to him in spite of requests and had no iusti-fiable ground for staying away from the husband, could claim a dissolution of marriage on the around that the husband ha3 failed or neglected to provide maintenance for her. 2. Our learned brother R. N. Dutt, J. in the connected Second Appeal answered the above question in the negative agreeing with the lower appellate court in its view on the said point. In support of his said conclusion, our learned brother and the lower appellate Court referred to several decisions, namely, Kadu v. Smt. Koleman Bibi, (1935) 39 Cal WN 876, Syed Abbas Ali V; Nazernunnessa Begum, (1939) 43 Cal WN 1059, Najiman Nissa Begum v. Serajuddin Ah-med Khan, AIR 1946 Pat 467 Jamila Khatun v. Kasim Ali Abbas Ali, AIR 1951 Nag 375. 3. In their judgment, they also referred to the contrary...
Haji Mokshed Mondal and ors. Vs. Del Rouson Bibi and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-10-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal162,75CWN277
P.N. Mookerjee, J.1. This appeal is by the plaintiff and it arises out of a suit for declaration of title and confirmation of possession and permanent injunction.2. The plaintiff's case was that he was the owner of the disputed property and was in possession of the same.3. The defence was a denial of the plaintiff's title and possession with a specific plea that defendant No. 1 was in possession of the disputed property, since her marriage with the plaintiff's son, in lieu of dower.4. The courts below have concurrently found in favour of the defendant on the question of possession. They have also concurred in finding that the disputed property was given to the defendant at the time of her marriage with the plaintiff's son in lieu of dower. They have, eventually, dismissed the plaintiff's suit primarily on the ground that, as against defendant No. 1, the plaintiff was not entitled to any relief in view of Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act. The plaintiff, feeling aggrieved by ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›