Mumbai Court May 1913 Judgments
Kunwar Brijraj Singh Vs. Kunwar Sheodan Singh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-05-1913
Reported in: (1913)15BOMLR652
Moulton, J. 1. This is a suit brought by two brothers, Rao Karan Singh and Kunwar Sheodan Singh (with whom are joined as plaintiffs their respective sons Kunwar Shibraj Singh and Kunwar Ranbir Singh), against the widow and son of their eldest brother Rao Sultan Singh, claiming a partition of certain properties which they allege to be the joint and undivided property of the family to which they belong, in which they are entitled to a two-thirds share. The defence is that the properties originally belonging to the family were the subject of a division by a family arrangement made and acted upon in 1895 during the lifetime of the father of the plaintiffs, and that thenceforward the properties ceased to be held jointly, and that those properties of which the defendants are in possession came to them under that family arrangement and became and still remain their separate property.2. The principal subject of dispute is village property. But the suit relates also to certain other property, a...
Tag this Judgment!Chiman Lal Vs. Hari Chand
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-1913
Reported in: (1913)15BOMLR646
John Edge, J.1. The suit in which this appeal has arisen was brought on the 19th January 1901m the Court of the District Judge of Ferozepore by Hari Chand, who is the respondent here, against Jiwan Mai, now dead, who is represented by Chiman Lal the appellant. In this suit Hari Chand sought a declaration that he was the adopted son of Jiwan Mai the then defendant. In his written statement Jiwan Mai alleged that he had never adopted Hari Chand.2. Hari Chand and Jiwan Mai were Hindus, and Agarwal Banias, of Zira, in the Punjab. Hari Chand was one of the four sons of Ghannu Mai, who was a brother of Jiwan Mai. Chiman Lal, the appellant here, was a son of Maya Mai, who was another brother of Jiwan Mai. At the time of the alleged adoption Hari Lal was an orphan and was married. No issue was framed by the District Judge as to whether the parties were governed by Hindu law or by custom, or as to the validity of the adoption if it, in fact, were made. The District Judge held that in the Punjab...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›