Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.37 seconds)

Abdurahim Haji Ismail Mithu vs Halimabai on 3 December, 1915

16. The existing position with reference to the parties before me in this matter is that the Courts take judicial notice of the primary fact that Mussalmans ordinarily follow what are known as rules of Muhammadan law (see, for instance, Abdulrahim Haji Ismail Mithu v. Halimabai (1915) L.R. 43 I.A. 35 : s.c. 18 Bom. L.R. 635). As the great majority of the Mussalmans in India follow the Hanafi school of Sunni law, the Courts presume that Muslims in India follow the Hanafi law unless the contrary is alleged and proved. Similarly, the presumption is that if the parties are Shiahs, they are governed by the Shiah law. The great majority of Shiahs, in their turn being Ithna Asharis, their exposition of the law is enforced, unless the parties show that their particular rule is different.
Bombay High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 11 - Full Document

Muhammad Ismail Khan vs Lala Sheomukh Rai And Musammat ... on 8 November, 1912

Much more recently, the Privy Council in a case involving the consideration of these principles Muhammad Ismail Khan v. Lala Sheomukh Rai (1912) 15 Bom. L.R. 76 : s.c. 17 C.W.N. 97 P.C. gave no reasons for arriving at a decision causing the reversal of the established practice of the Allahabad High Court. The Privy Council laid down that customs in derogation of the law of Islam ought to be allowed to be proved even in cases governed by an enactment to the imperative effect that the rule of decision shall be the Muhammadan law.
Bombay High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 9 - Full Document
1   2 Next