Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.35 seconds)

Ramji Sharma @ Ramji Banu (Dead) By L.Rs vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 19 September, 1996

18.In the said circumstances, both the learned courts below rightly came to the conclusion that the deed of gift dated 31.05.1991 was void on the basis of the aforementioned facts and also on the basis of bar created by section 5 of the Consolidation Act. So far the case law relied upon by learned counsel for the respondents, in a case of Ram Raji Sharma & Anr. Vs. The State of Bihar and others, reported in 2007(4) PLJR 449 is concerned, it also does not come to the rescue of the defendants-respondents as it was only held therein that if a transaction is made during the pendency of a consolidation proceeding, it is void in so far as the consolidation proceedings are concerned and not the transaction inter-se the transferor and the transferee. Hence, it has been merely held that such a transaction cannot be held to be void inter-se the transferor and the transferee, but in the instant case, the transfer in question is not claimed to be void inter-se the transferor and the transferee, rather it is the other rightful owners of the property, namely the plaintiffs, who are neither the transferor nor the transferee, who have filed the suit against the transferor and the transferee claiming the said transfer to be void. Accordingly, this point is also decided in favour of plaintiffs-appellants and against the defendants-respondents.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 18 - N P Singh - Full Document

Brijendra Kumar Sinha vs Akhileshwar Prasad And Ors. on 21 May, 1991

19. So far the defendants'-respondents' claim regarding relinquishment by plaintiff no.2 Lalti Devi is concerned, the law is well settled that any relinquishment or surrender cannot create any right, title or interest in a property nor it can be treated as a transfer. Reference in that regard may be made to a decision of a Division Bench of this court in the case of Brijendra Kumar Sinha Vs. Akhileshwar Prasad and others, reported in 1991(2) PLJR 625 and another decision of this court in case of Mst.
Patna High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Mst. Samrathi Devi vs Parasuram Pandey And Ors. on 11 September, 1974

Samrathi Devi Vs. Parasuram Pandey and others, reported in AIR 1975 Patna 140. In addition thereto, the said plea was not taken earlier nor the said issues were framed by either the learned trial court or the 10 learned court of appeal below and even hereinbefore by this court. Although the said point has been raised by defendants-respondents but there is no valid material either oral or documentary to show any relinquishment by plaintiff-2 Lalti Devi which could legally amount to transfer of her right, title, interest and share in the properties, which she admittedly inherited from her father. Hence, this objection raised by the defendants- respondents is also without any merit and is accordingly rejected.
Patna High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 34 - Full Document
1   2 Next