Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.23 seconds)
Documents citing Rafail Uraon And Anr. vs Baiha Uraon And Anr. on 12 April, 1956

Langa Manjhi And Ors. vs Jaba Majhian And Ors. on 14 May, 1970

15. In my opinion, whether a person is Hinduised completely or otherwise is a question of fact. Mr. Mukherji drew our attention to certain observations in the judgment of Ray, J. in the case of Chunku Manjhi aforesaid (AIR 1946 Pat 218) to the effect that the question whether a person is Hinduised either completely or partially is a mixed question of law and fact, and, therefore, this Court should go into that question in second appeal itself. In that case, the other learned Judge, namely, Fazl Ali C. J., as he then was, had said that in view of the pleadings and findings arrived at by the courts below which were based on evidence, he agreed that the view taken by the courts below was correct; in other words, he did not treat the question as a mixed question of law and fact. I am fortified in my view expressed in the beginning of this paragraph by the observations made in the cases of AIR 1925 Pat 733. Harakhnath Ohdar v. Ganpat Rai, AIR 1941 Pat 625 and Rafail Uraon v. Baiha Uraon, AIR 1957 Pat 70. The question being one of fact, it is, in my opinion, concluded by the concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the courts below and it cannot be gone into over again by this court in second appeal.
Patna High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 6 - Full Document
1