Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.34 seconds)Vithoba Madhav Shanbhog vs Madhav Damodar Shanbhog on 16 January, 1918
In support of the appeal, Mr. Gupta relied very strongly upon the above decision of the Bombay High Court in ILR 42 Bom.
Harkisandas Bhagwandas vs Bai Dhanoo on 8 September, 1933
The other Bombay case of Harkisandas Bhagwandas v. Bai Dhanoo, AIR 1934 Bom. 171, decided by a learned single Judge (Shingru, J.), did, in essence, follow the said earlier case, reported in ILR 42 Bom. 344 : (AIR 1918 Bom 158), which was substantially similar to it and stands on no different footing.
Jhanda Singh And Ors. vs Sheikh Wahid-Ud-Din And Ors. on 22 March, 1910
The two cases before the Privy Council also (Sital Pershad v. Lachmi Pershad Singh, 10 Ind App 129 and jhanda Singh v. Wahid-ud-Din, 43 Ind App 284 : (AIR 1916 PC 49), which were noticed and considered in ILR 49 Bom.
Basdeo Rai And Anr. vs Jhagroo Rai on 7 April, 1922
8. We have dealt with the main and, indeed, the only argument, practically speaking, which was advanced by Mr. Gupta in support of this appeal and, according to us, in the view, expressed above, that argument cannot be accepted. We may also observe, in passing, that the preemption clause in question suffers from no infirmity either on account of any uncertainty in its terms or as being contrary to or offending any law, for example, the rule of perpetuity. It is enough for the above purpose to refer to the three cases of the Allahabad High Court, reported in Basdeo Rai v. Jhagru Rai, ILR 46 All 333: (AIR 1924 All 400), Muhammad Jan v. Fazal-ud-Din, ILR 48 All.
Aulad Ali And Ors. vs Syed Ali Athar And Anr. on 31 January, 1927
514: (AIR 1924 All 657); Aulad Ali v. Ali Athar ; and the Full Bench case of this Court, Ali Hossain v. Rajkumar Haldar . The clause is also perfectly valid and legal and clearly enforceable under, inter alia, Section 27(b) of the Specific Relief Act and Section 40 of the Transfer of Property Act and no objection can be taken against it on the ground that it contravenes any law of the land and is, accordingly, invalid.
Moulvi Ali Hossain Mian And Ors. vs Rajkumar Haldar And Ors. on 2 April, 1943
514: (AIR 1924 All 657); Aulad Ali v. Ali Athar ; and the Full Bench case of this Court, Ali Hossain v. Rajkumar Haldar . The clause is also perfectly valid and legal and clearly enforceable under, inter alia, Section 27(b) of the Specific Relief Act and Section 40 of the Transfer of Property Act and no objection can be taken against it on the ground that it contravenes any law of the land and is, accordingly, invalid.