Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.19 seconds)Section 60 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882
Aniruddha Mitra vs Official Receiver, Alipur Judge'S ... on 27 August, 1941
11. In that case a testator who had vast properties practically disinherited his son, but provided in the will that a sum of Rs. 700 per month was to be given to him out of the income of the estate. On an interpretation of the will it was held that the provision was by way of a maintenance grant and, as such, it could not be assigned in view of the provisions of Section 6(dd), T. P. Act. A contention was raised in that case that there could be no right to maintenance unless the provision made was on account of an antecedent obligation on the part of the grantor to maintain the grantee under the personal law of the parties. In view however of the expression "in whatsoever manner arising" used in Section 6(dd), the learned Judges repelled this contention.
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Sivaji Govinda Rao Mohitay Rao Saheb vs N.N.C.T.C.V. Firm By Its Partner ... on 8 April, 1935
The decision in the case of Shivaji Govinda Rao v. N. N. C. T. V. Firm, A. I. R. 1935 Mad. 815, to the effect that Section 60(1)(n), Civil P. C. applied only to cases where a right to maintenance is based on the personal law or personal relationship of the parties, and not to cases where such a right is purely the result of a contractual arrangement between the parties, was dissented from.
Nageshwar Prasad Singh vs Chhotey Lal And Ors. on 20 January, 1944
13. Next, reference may be made to the case of Nageshwar Prasad v. Chotey Lal, 1944 ALL.
Syed Mahbub Ali And Ors. vs Syed Mohammad on 18 February, 1944
14. Then the learned Judges proceeded to consider the terms of the document in that case, i.e., a will under which the allowance was fixed. In none of these cases wag there any question about the nature of the right of a beneficiary to receive a periodical payment under a wakf. On an interpretation of the terms of the will, it was held that the allowance was not an 'allowance for maintenance.
1