Guran Ditta vs T. Ram Ditta on 24 April, 1928
172) Guran Ditta Vs. Ram Ditta and the other case law is Pandit Pushkar Nath
71 Ind App 1997 = (AIR 1945 PC 10) . It was held in the first case as
follows:
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.29 seconds)Dalavai Nagarajamma vs State Bank Of India, Cuttapah And Ors. on 14 August, 1961
8. The counsel for the appellant/plaintiff drew my attention to (
AIR 1962 ANDHRA PRADESH 260) Dalavai Nagarajamma vs. State Bank of India,
Cuttapah and others, wherein also it was mentioned that on the death of one of
the depositors, the resultant factor is trust and the money becomes absolute
property of deceased and is payable to his heirs in the absence of contrary
intention. It was further mentioned that there is a resulting trust in his
favour in the absence of proof of a contrary intention, there being no
presumption of intended advancement in favour of the other person. In the
instant case, there is no pleading or proof or any document showing that
Sengoda Gounder has gifted in favour of Parvathy, one of the heirs, while
Sengoda Gounder had two sons and four daughters.
Shanti Prasad Jain vs The Director Of Enforcement on 19 April, 1962
10. Again, the counsel for the appellant/plaintiff relief upon
observation found in (2 S.C.R. 297) Shanti Prasad Jain Vs. The Director of
Enforcement. In (1963) S.C.R. Page 324, which is found as follows:
Section 100 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Khushaldas And Others vs Mohanarangam on 6 September, 1996
6. This was fortified in 1996-2-L.W. 474 (Kushaldas and eight
others vs. Mohanarangam and another), wherein also, there was nothing to show
that the deceased depositor wanted to make over the amount to the surviving
depositor and there was nothing to show that the depositor gifted the same to
the survivor. In that case also a substantial question of law for
consideration arose and the same is as follows:
Kinkar Santananda Sanyasi vs State Bank Of India And Ors. on 8 March, 2002
11. Counsel for the first defendant Bank also relied on a decision
cited in Kinkar Santananda Sanyasi Vs. State Bank Of India and others (AIR
2002 ORISSA 114), wherein two case laws were referred and they were reported
as (AIR 1971 SC 1962) Indranarayan v. Roop Narayan and another and (AIR 1937
Lahore 196 (2) at p. 198) Bakshi Tek Chand J., in Mt.Charjo vs. Dina Nath.
In the first case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows:
1