REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

JALDHARI MAHTO Appellant

V/S

RAJENDRA SINGH Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

PICKUP V. THAMES INSURANCE CO. [REFERRED TO]
DHANI JHA V. MT. DHAROHARI KUER [REFERRED TO]
SHIVA PD. SINGH V. HIRA SINGH [REFERRED TO]
MATUK SINGH V. TIAN SAHU [REFERRED TO]
SECRETARY OF STATE V. CHELIKANI RAMA RAO [REFERRED TO]
MIDNAPORE ZAMINDARY CO. LTD. V. PANDAY SARDAR [REFERRED TO]
MOHAN BIKRAM SHAH V. DEONARAIN [REFERRED TO]
LAKSHMANNA V. VENKATESWARLU [REFERRED TO]
BEHARI LAL V. NARAIN DAS [REFERRED TO]
RAMESHWAR SINGH BAHADUR V. HIT LAL SINGH [REFERRED TO]
TELANGA MARANDI MAJHI V. CHANDRA MOHAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
RAMNATH SARANGI V. GOBARDHAN PANDEY [REFERRED TO]
M A RAUF VS. BODHI SINGH [REFERRED TO]
OFFICIAL RECEIVER OF EAST GODAVARI VS. CHAVA GOVINDARAJU [REFERRED TO]
KAMESHWAR SINGH BAHADUR VS. FATURI MISSRA [REFERRED TO]
BINDHYACHAL CHAND VS. RAM GHARIB CHAND [REFERRED TO]
RAMDAHIN LOHAR VS. RAMDHANI MAHTO [REFERRED TO]
BASIRUDDIN SARKAR VS. SAHEBULLA PRAMANIK [REFERRED TO]
HARNANDAN SINGH VS. SMRAMANANDDI KUER [REFERRED TO]
BADRI NARAIN JHA VS. RAGHUNANDAN JHA [REFERRED TO]
NAINAPILLAI MARAKAYAR VS. RAMANATHAN CHETTIAR [REFERRED TO]
SETURATNAM AIYAR VS. VENKATACHALA GOUNDEN [REFERRED TO]
JAGDEO NARAIN SINGH VS. BALDEO SINGH [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Second Appeal 462 of 1951 came up before a Division Bench of this Court from a decision of the 1st Additional Subordinate Judge, Muzaffarpur, dated 10th January. 1951. The main orgument be-fore the Bench was that there is a conflict between the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in M. A. Rauf v. Bodhi Singh, AIR 1950 Pat 484 (A) and a subsequent decision of another Division Bench in Dhani Jha v. Mt. Dharohari Kuer, 1955 B L J R 202 (B). In the course of argument reference was made to certain other decisions of the Privy Council and this Court, and the learned Judges before whom the appeal came considered that in view of the conflict of decisions, the case required consideration by a larger Bench and, therefore, referred the case to a Full Bench for determination.

(2.) Subsequently, Second Appeal 386 of 1951 from a decision of the 1st Additional District Judge, Muzaffarpur, dated 9th January 1951, came up before the said Division Bench, and the point involved was almost the same. The learned Judges, therefore, referred this case also to a Full Bench for disposal along with Second Appeal 462 of 1951. These two appeals have been accordingly consolidated and heard analogously, and this judgment will govern both.

(3.) The important question for consideration on which rests the decision of these two appeals is which of the two conflicting decisions in the cases of M. A. Rauf (A) and Dhani Jha (B) referred to above, is correct.

Click here to view full judgment.

JALDHARI MAHTO Vs. RAJENDRA SINGH

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address