Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.44 seconds)
Documents citing Mazhar Husain Khan vs Abdul Hadi Khan on 17 January, 1911

C. Kunhamutty vs Thondikkodan Ahmad Musaliar And Ors. on 11 September, 1934

8. According to Lord Robertson the test must be the charitable use or uses; and even before Act VI of 1913, the purpose according to the decisions had to be religious or charitable The words then were exactly the same as they are now; and it appears to us that in all cases upon this point the charitable purposes of the gift have always been stressed as the important ones. This question has been considered by myself and Bardswell, J., in O.S. A. No. 71 of 1932 in a judgment delivered on the 19th December, 1933, at present unreported We there held, after an examination of a number of cases some of them relating to wakfs and one of them being Mazhar Husain Khan v. Abdul Hadi Khan (1911) I.L.R. 33 All. 400 before-mentioned, that to create a valid trust for religious purposes there must be now, as there was then, a charitable object and we see no reason whatever for coming to any different conclusion. In our view, it is quite clear that the dedication in question being merely for the purpose of reciting the Koran over a tomb of a private person did not create a valid wakf and that the District Munsif was correct in so holding. It follows that this Second Appeal must be allowed with costs here and in the lower Appellate Court and the order of the District Munsif restored.
Madras High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 12 - Full Document

Gobinda Chandra Ghosh Alias G. Ghosh And ... vs Abdul Majid Ostagar And Ors. on 22 June, 1943

After this follows the Clause appointing mutwallis of the wakf. The executant did not retain for him even the office of the mutwalli His daughter Meherjan and his wife Rostam alias Dana Bibi were appointed mutwallis. Standing by itself therefore, the document purported to create a wakf of the property described in it. The object mentioned is certainly a valid object to sustain a wakf: Muzbar Husain v. Abdul Hadi Khan ('11) 33 All. 400.
Calcutta High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 7 - B K Mukherjea - Full Document

The Advocate General Of Bombay vs Yusufalli Ebrahim on 19 March, 1921

In the Allahabad Courts some doubts have arisen in two Sunni cases, but the eventual decision was that the Fatyeh ceremonies were valid charities (see Mazhar Husain Khan v. Abdul Hadi Khan (1911) I.L.R. 33 All. 400, 406). In the present case, it does not appear that any alms are given to the poor, but on the other hand the celebrations are open to the rich and poor alike. It is true that the Mullaji sends out the invitations for the feasts, but these are ' effected by a crier, and are of a general nature.
Bombay High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 7 - Full Document

The Advocate-General Of Bombay vs Yusuf Alli Ebrahim And Ors. on 19 March, 1921

128. It is a far cry from a BombayJamai feast, to a Yorkshire clerical dinner, but some observations of Mr. Justice Eve in re Charlesworth (1910) 101 L.T. 908 : 54 S.J. 196 26 T.L.R. 214 seem to me to be apposite, and I will quote them. The gift in that case was to the Chairman, etc., of the Cleveland Clerical Society upon trust to appropriate the dividends in payment of the expenses of the annual dinners which the Society held. Mr. Justice Eve said that the gift must increase the attendance at the meetings, and proceeded:
Bombay High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 14 - Full Document

Abdur Rafey Khan vs Banni Begam And Anr. on 15 May, 1912

578; Mazhar Hussin Khan v. Abdul Hadi Khan 8 A.L.J. 162 : 9 Ind. Cas. 753 : 33 A. 400 Moreover, the deed before us seems to have been carefully drafted in order to meet the doubts suggested by these rulings. It provides in every case that the expenditure shall be on charitable objects, the distribution of food to the poor and the like, on the occasion of the ceremonies in question. The difficulty, which some strict Muhammadans have felt regarding the validity of prayers for the repose of the souls of the departed as a suitable "religious" object for a trust or endowment, scarcely seems to arise at all. The distribution of food to the poor is a "charitable" object, and it is difficult to see how it can become less so because the founder of the endowment chooses to associate it with certain particular dates and with the anniversaries of the deaths of departed saints, worthies or relatives of his own. It seems impossible, therefore, to hold that we have not in this trust-deed a substantial dedication of property to religious and charitable purposes. The total annual income of the property dealt with is about Rs. 9,000 and after this objection regarding the "urs" or "fateha" ceremonies has been overruled, there remain only two items to which exception can be taken. These are items Nos. 8 and 12. The first of these provides that Rs. 3,000 shall be sent every year, through a certain firm of bankers at Delhi, to Mecca and Medina for expenditure on various charitable objects. On the face of it, the provision is perfectly good, the suggestion on behalf of the appellant is that it is purely illusory, as Abdul Wajid Khan intended shortly to proceed to Mecca himself and meant the money for his own use. Nothing is proved in support of this suggestion beyond the fact that Abdul Wajid Khan did proceed to Mecca shortly afterwards, and in fact died there. We see no good or sufficient reason for holding that this clause of the trust-deed was not intended to operate according to its apparent purport. By the twelfth clause, a further sum of Rs. 3,000 yearly is directed to be paid over to Abdul Wajid Khan's wife, to be spent in charity at her discretion; the suggestion is that the real object was to provide for the lady's own needs for her life-time. It seems sufficient to say that a wakf of property yielding an income of Rs. 9,000 a year would certainly not have been invalidated even if the trust had been saddled, frankly and openly, with the provision of a life annuity of Rs. 3,000 in favour of the wife of the wakif.
Allahabad High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 Next