Privy Council Court October 1940 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.
Sri Iswar Ram Chandra Bigraha Thakur and Another Vs. Bengal Duars Bank ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Oct-30-1940
Lord Thankerton: The appellant, Prasanna Deb Raikat, sues for himself and as shebait for an Idol, Sri Sri Iswar Ram Chandra Bigraha, who is thus in name a plaintiff and appellant, in the five suits which are the subject of the five consolidated appeals against a judgment and five decrees of the High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal, dated 16th June 1936, which affirmed a judgment and five decrees of the subordinate Judge of Jalpaiguri, dated 23rd December 1932, dismissing the five suits with costs. In three of the suits Prasanna Deb Raikat, who may be referred to as the appellant, seeks to set aside permanent leases at fixed rents granted by Sitaram Bairagi, whom the appellant - in view of the findings of the Courts below - does not now dispute to have been hereditary shebait of the Idol. In the other two suits the appellant seeks ejectment of temporary tenants, on whom notice to quit has been served. The appellant's original grounds of suit were that the Idol had been ins...
ismail Ahmed Peepadi Vs. MomIn Bibi and Others
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Oct-29-1940
Sir George Rankin: The appellant Ismail Ahmed Peepadi (herein called "the plaintiff") was born on 1st May 1919. On 12th November 1936 - when he was seventeen years old-the suit out of which this appeal arises was brought on his behalf in the District Court of Amherst in Burma. Abdul Gaffoor, his mother's elder brother, acted as next friend, and on 8th December 1936, leave was obtained to sue in forma pauperis. The purpose of the suit was to establish that the plaintiff was the legitimate son and only child of one Haji Ahmed Peepadi, an inhabitant of Moulmein, who had died there on 8th August 1935, leaving one widow Momin Bibi, defendant 1 and that under the law applicable to Sunni Mahomedans the plaintiff was entitled to a fourteen annas share in the deceased's estate. This claim had been first made, so far as appears, by a lawyer's letter dated 18th February 1936. The estate of the deceased consisted in part of a one-fourth share in the estate of his father who had died on or about 12...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›