Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.24 seconds)
Lallu Singh vs Gur Narain And Ors. on 25 July, 1922 cites

Tricomdas Cooverji Bhoja vs Sri Sri Gopinath Jiu Thakur on 20 December, 1916

Where the terms of a Statute or Ordinance are clear, then even a long and uniform course of judicial interpretation of it may be overruled, if it is contrary to the clear meaning of the enactment but where such is not the case, then it is our duty to accept the interpretation so often and so long put upon the Statute by the Courts, and not to disturb those decisions, vide the remarks of their Lordships decisions, vide the remarks of their Lordships of the Privy Council in the case of Tricomdas Cooverji Bhoja v. Sri Sri Gopinath Thakur 39 Ind. Cas. 156 : 25 C. L. J. 279 at p. 284 : 1 P. L. T. 262 : 15 A. L .T. 217 : 33 M. L. J. 357 : 21 M. L. T. 262 : 21 C. W. N. 577 : (1917) M. W. N. 363 : 5 L. W. 564 : 19 Bom. L. Rule 460 : 44 C. 759 : 44 I. A. 85 (P. C.). We are, therefore, clearly of opinion that it must now be accepted that the provisions of Section 123 do away with the necessity for the delivery of possession, even if it was required by the strict Hindu Law.
Bombay High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 59 - Full Document

Uma Chand Sett And Anr. vs Kanai Lal Sett And Anr. And Srimati ... on 18 April, 1921

13. A reference bas also been made to a passage in Ram Lal Sett v. Kanai Lal Sett 12 C. 603 at p. 668 : 6 Ind. Dec. (n. s.) 450 to the effect that gifts are of three kinds--those which convey a present title and interest, and a present right of enjoyment; those which are vested, that is, present in interest, but in which the enjoyment is deferred; and those which are contingent, that is to say, in which neither title nor right of enjoyment is given at present, but both depend upon future and certain events. All these kinds of gifts are admissible among Hindus, all are recognized by the Succession Act, the Hindu Wills Act, and the Transfer of Property Act. All these kinds of gifts may among Hindus be given subject to various restrictions, either inter vivos or by Will, and, speaking generally, the same law applies in either case." But this remark is certainly an obiter dictum.
Calcutta High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 4 - Full Document
1