Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.35 seconds)The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882
Section 11 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Raja Sagi Padmanbharaju vs Sagi Lakshmi Kumara Raju And Ors. on 22 April, 1966
In the case of Raja Sagi Padmanbhar-jai v. Sagi Laxmi Kumar Raji (AIR 1967 Andh Pra 237), a Full Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that a transferee from a Hindu father can get the benefit of Section 53-A when a suit for possession is filed by the sons of the transferor who were minors when the transaction was entered into, if the father had executed the document for the benefit of the family. In the circumstances it was held that the father had executed the transfer on behalf of his sons as Karta.
Yeditha Satyanarayanamurty And Ors. vs Tadi Subrahmanyam And Ors. on 5 January, 1959
23. A Full Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court was constituted, as a contrary view had been taken by an earlier Division Bench decision of the Madras High Court. Before the Full Bench it was argued that the earlier decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court which was in the case of Yeditha Satyanarayanamurty v. Tadi Subrahmanyam (AIR 1959 Andh Pra 534) required reconsideration in view of the decision of the Privy Council in the case of Subrahmanyan v. Subba Rao (AIR 1948 PC 95).
Bhupal Chandra Sircar And Ors. vs Jagad Bhusan Sircar And Ors. on 31 July, 1942
In this connection, the learned Judge hearing the appeal referred to the case of Bhupal Chandra v. Jagad Bhushan, (AIR 1943 Cal 344). In that case a transfer had been made by a widow and the step daughter had filed a suit. It was held that the step daughter and the transferee from her could not be said to be a person claiming under the witlow and, therefore, the transferee from the widow was not entitled to the protection under Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act.
1