Open iDraf
Adaikka Maistry v. Muthusami Ambalagaran

Adaikka Maistry
v.
Muthusami Ambalagaran

(High Court Of Judicature At Madras)

No | 13-04-1914

[1] The finding is that the widow has alienated the whole estate and that the next reversioner has consented to the alienation. The rule that the widow may alienate the whole estate with the consent of the next reversioner is not affected by the recent decision of the Calcutta Full Bench Debi Prosad Chowdhry v. Golap Bhagat (1918) I.L.R. 40 C. 721 or by the recent decision of the Privy Council Bijoy Gopal Mukerji v. Grindra Nath Mukerji (1914) 18 C.W.N.673 P.C. which only deals with partial alienations. The decrees were right and the second appeals are dismissed with costs.

Advocates List

For the Appearing Parties ----

For Petitioner
  • Shekhar Naphade
  • Mahesh Agrawal
  • Tarun Dua
For Respondent
  • S. Vani
  • B. Sunita Rao
  • Sushil Kumar Pathak

Bench List

JUSTICE

Eq Citation

(1914) 27 MLJ 24

25 IND. CAS. 144

AIR 1915 MAD 426 1

LQ/MadHC/1914/175

HeadNote

Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Ss. 123, 124, 125 and 126 — Widow's right to alienate — Calcutta Full Bench decision, Debi Prosad Chowdhry v Golap Bhagat, AIR 1918 Cal 721, and Privy Council decision, Bijoy Gopal Mukerji v Grindra Nath Mukerji, 18 CWN 673, distinguished — Widow may alienate whole estate with consent of next reversioner

©2020 - LQ Global Services Private Limited. All rights reserved.