Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh – An Overview

We do not think the words admit of any doubt, particu- larly as the words “malik mustaqil” have been used: see Ram Gopal v. We have no doubt he did. In that case the reversion did not fall in till . ” He qualifies this in cross-examination by saying that Kishan Lal had also objected to it but the witness did not know whether that was before or after Mst. Mohan Dei had a son Shri Kishan Das who was the next presumptive reversioner and as the boy was a good deal younger than Brijlal, Brijlal’s chances were slim.

This dispute was referred to arbitration and an award was delivered. “Furthermore, when the nd party Mohan Dei has inher- ited no property from her husband, she, in case of getting this share, will certainly settle down in Amroha and will make her father’s haveli as her abode and thus the haveli shall remain a bad as heretofore, and Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 in this way the de- ceased’s name will be perpetuated; and it is positive that, after the Musammat, this property shall devolve on her son, Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 who will be the malik owner thereof, and later the de- scendant of this son will become the owner thereof.

His retention of the property therefore and his continuing to deal with it on the basis of the award indicated his own acceptance of the award and, therefore, by his acts and conduct, he represented that he also, like his father, Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 admitted the existence of facts which would in Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 give Mst. that even if the award be assumed to be invalid the plaintiffs’ claim was barred by the plea of estoppel. The plain- tiffs state that the two branches of the family were sepa- rate at all material times; that on Shanker Lal’s death in his daughter Mst.

Costs here and in the High Court will be borne by the plaintiffs-respondents. Agent for Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 the respondents: Sardar Bahadur Saharya. The plaintiffs lost in the first Court but won in the High Court. Chandika Prasad Kumari . They divide the property which their grandmother Mst. They were therefore in no better position than Brij- lal and as Brijlal would have been estopped, the estoppel descended to them also because they stepped into his shoes. There can be no doubt that she acted to her detriment and there can, we think, be equally no doubt that she was in- duced to do so on the faith of Brijlal’s statements and conduct which induced her to believe that he accepted all the implications of the award.

The learned counsel for the plaintiffs-respondents had to search diligently for the meaning for which he contended in other passages and had to make several assumptions which do not appear on the face of the award as to what the arbitra- tor must have thought and must have intended. That would have been a perfectly right and proper settlement of the dispute, and whether it bound third parties or not it would certainly bind the immediate parties; and Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 that in effect is what they did.

Even if the arbitrator was wholly wrong and even if he had no power to decide as he did, Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 it was open to both sides to accept the decision and by their acceptance recognise the existence of facts which would in law give the other an absolute estate in the properties they agreed to divide among themselves and did divide. Third, the arbitrator’s view of the Hindu law, namely that- “the brother should be the owner of the joint ancestral property and the daughter who has a male issue should be owner of the self-acquired property.

The fact remains that he pressed his claim and was serious about it, so much so that he was able to per- suade the arbitrator that he had an immediate right to part of the estate. The decree of the High Court is set aside and that of the first Court dismissing the plaintiffs’ claim is restored. Mohan Dei to deal with the estate as her own, for she, on her part. There was estoppel against B because by his conduct he induced M to believe that the decision of the arbitrator was fair and reasonable and both the parties would be bound by it and he induced her to act greatly to her detriment and to alter her position by accepting the award and never attempting to go behind it as long as he lived; there was estoppel against B’s sons because it descended to them as they stepped into his shoes, and fur- ther there was independent estoppel against B’s son K by his acts and conduct as evidenced in this case.

The question therefore is, did he continue to be bound by the estoppel when he assumed a new character on the opening out of the reversion ? Kishan Lal’s inaction over these years with full knowledge of the facts, as is evident from the deposition of D. Nand Lal and Others and Bishunath Prasad Singh v. Agent for the appellants: Ganpat Rai. In our opinion, the defendants are right. The defendants say that it gave Mst.

The decision of the Judicial Committee which we have just cited, Kanhai Lal v. Mohan Dei’s son Shri Kishan Das predeceased her. The first question is about the nature of the award. he passages relied on are these. The defendants claim that the plaintiffs are bound by this award and are in any event estopped. It is beyond dispute that he laid serious claim to the property in . Brijlal , is, we think, clear on that point. Deoki Jugal Kishore Amar Nath d. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION:Civil Appeal No.

On Shanker Lal’s death disputes arose between Shanker Lal’s father’s brother’s son Brijlal the plaintiffs’ grandfa- ther and the defendants’ grandmother Mst. Kishan Lal knew of the award. In our opinion, that decision is to be distinguished. That, in our opinion is a representation of an existing fact or set of facts. , – – respective- ly in the said properties; and accordingly. We turn next to his son Kishan Lal. The reversion opened out on her death in October and the plaintiffs are entitled as the next reversioners, for Mst.

” And lastly, this passage– ; S. The defendants Ms grandsons alleged that the property possessed by M consisted partly of property which belonged to her and partly of property which belonged exclusively to her father to which she succeeded as daughter. The defendants claimed that the plaintiffs were bound by the award and were in any event estopped from challenging it. Mohan Dei died, that is, Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 for a further forty years, and led Mst. also acted on the award and claimed absolute rights in the property assigned to her.

Mohan Dei would at once have sued and would then for forty years have obtained the benefit of property from which she was excluded because of her acceptance of the award on the faith of Brijlal’s asser- tion that he too accepted it. A division was effected and ever since the date of the award in each branch continued in possession of the proper- ties allotted to it and each had been dealing with them as absolute owner. Proceeding help a person comfortable a problem environment and can help you network with potential employers.

Mohan Dei’s son Shri Kishan Das died and Kishan Lal thereupon became the next presumptive reversioner, and in October, , when the reversion opened out the estate vested in him, or rather would have vested in him but for Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 the estoppel. Each would consequently be estopped as against the other and Brijlal in particular would have been estopped from denying the existence of facts which would give Mst. Jairam accordingly reaped the benefit of the transaction.

But in any event, we are clear that Brijlal would have been estopped. Achhru Ram Jwala Prasad, Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 with him for the respondent February . But nevertheless he took possession along with his brother and the two of them treated the property as their own and derived benefit from it. Had he lived another eight or nine months he would have succeeded and the plaintiffs would have been nowhere. ” In the other case, Rangasami Gounden v. See Ramgouda Annagouda v. The Judicial Committee rejected the claim on the ground of estoppel and held that even though the plaintiff claimed in a different character in the suit, namely as reversioner, he having been a party to the compro- mise and having acted on it and induced the other side to alter her position to her detriment, was estopped.

  • No tienes Favoritos seleccionados
hola