Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.83 seconds)
Documents citing Shambhu Singh vs Daljit Singh And Ors. on 17 February, 1916

Bijai Misir And Anr. vs Kali Prasad Misir And Ors. on 30 March, 1917

It is not necessary for the purposes of this case to say whether I agree or disagree with the ruling in Shambhu Singh v. Daljit Singh (1916) I.L.R. 38 All. 243 referred to above, as the facts of that case are different from those of the present case, but if it is deemed that the principle involved in that case is the same as that which arises in this, I am unable, with great deference, to acquiesce in all that was said in that case. In my judgement the decision of the learned Judge, of this Court from which this appeal has been preferred undo the Letters Patent is correct and I would dismiss the appeal.
Allahabad High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 19 - Full Document

Bijai Misir And Anr. vs Kali Prasad Misir And Ors. on 30 March, 1917

It is not necessary for the purposes of this case to say whether I agree or disagree with the ruling in Shambhu Singh v. Daljit Singh (1) referred to above, as the facts of that case are different from those of the present case but if it is deemed that the principle involved in that case is the same as that which arises in this, I am unable, with great deference, to acquiesce in all that was said in that case. In my judgment the decision of the learned Judge of this Court from which this appeal has been preferred under the Letters Patent is correct and I would dismiss the appeal.
Allahabad High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ram Raikha Misir vs Lallu Misir And Ors. on 20 January, 1931

In the Full Bench ruling of Shambhu Singh v. Daljit Singh [1916] 38 All. 302 I.C. 19 it was held that Section 233(k), Land Revenue Act, did not bar a civil suit because that suit did not relate to partition or union of a mahal. The plaintiff had sued for a declaration of his title to a certain share which had been allotted to the defendants. What was meant by this ruling was that such a suit if granted would merely substitute the plaintiff for the defendant as the owner of the share in question and by this substitution the actual arrangement of the shares in the mahals and pattis would not be disturbed. This is what we call the narrow view of the interpretation of Section 233 (k), Land Revenue Act.
Allahabad High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Shera vs Hait Ram And Ors. on 22 November, 1926

3. Neither of the Courts have recorded a finding on the question as to whether or not the plaintiffs are the proprietors of the plot in dispute. The trial Court held that the suit was barred by Section 233(k), Land Revenue Act, and on that finding dismissed the suit. The lower appellate Court has held that Section 233(k), Land Revenue Act, did not constitute a bar to the present claim of the plaintiffs. In my opinion the lower appellate Court was right in so holding. On the findings arrived at by the lower appellate Court, it is abundantly clear that the plaintiffs were not party to the partition proceedings in the course of which the plot in dispute was allotted to the defendant. Not being parties to the partition proceedings the plaintiffs are not bound by those proceedings. The matter is concluded by the Full Bench decision in Shambhu Singh v. Daljit Singh [1916] 38 All, 243.
Allahabad High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mahabir Singh vs Debi Charan Singh And Ors. on 17 May, 1926

5. The plaintiff has come up in appeal and it is argued on his behalf that Section 233(k) of the Land Revenue Act cannot bar this suit because the suit is not in respect of partition or union of the mahals, and the relief sought by the plaintiff could not be given by the revenue Court at all. I am of opinion that Section 233(k) of the Land Revenue Act did not bar the suit. The case on which the lower appellate Court relied, viz., Daljit Singh v. Shambhu Singh AIR 1915 All 452 is no longer good law, as on Letters Patent Appeal in that very case a Fall Bench of this Court took a different view: see the case of Shambhu Singh v. Daljit Singh AIR 1916 All 12.
Allahabad High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1