Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.16 seconds)G.F.C. Ariff vs Rai Jadunath Majumdar Bahadur on 23 January, 1931
This decision of the Privy Council in Ariff v. Jadunath
Majumdar (2), was given in January 1931. Nearly two years
before that s. 53A had been enacted in the Transfer of
Property Act introducing in a limited form the doctrine of
equity of part performance. There can, in our opinion, be
no doubt that after s. 53A was enacted the only case in
which the English doctrine of equity of part performance
could
(1) (1916) L. R. 43 I.A. 138.
Section 53A in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Asita Mohan Ghose Moulik vs Nerode Mohan Ghose Moulik on 8 May, 1916
In Asita Mohon Ghosh Moulik v. Mohan Ghosh Moulik (1), one
of the questions in dispute was whether the adopted son
could take an equal share with the son Answering the
question in the affirmative, the High Court of Calcutta
after deciding that under the Hindu Law the adopted son was
entitled to an equal share, also referred to an Ikrarnama
which had been executed by the adoptive fatherland holding
that the Ikrarnama was valid and operative, said that even
apart from the law, the adopted son, would be so entitled.
It is difficult to see how this can be of any assistance in
solving our present problem.
Bhala Nahana vs Parbhu Hari on 7 June, 1877
In Bhalla Nahana v. Prabhu Hari (2), which was the next
case cited, what happened was that one Gosai
(1) (1872) 7 Mad. H.C.R. 25.
1