Skip to content


Javer Jijibhai Vs. Haribhai Hansji - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberSecond Appeal No. 443 of 1914
Judge
Reported inAIR1915Bom264; (1915)17BOMLR1131; 33Ind.Cas.426
AppellantJaver Jijibhai
RespondentHaribhai Hansji
DispositionAppeal dismissed
Excerpt:
bhagdari act (bom. act v of 1862), section 3-alienation-transfer by testamentary devise is alienation.;the word 'alienation' as used in section 3 of the bhagdari act, 1862, includes a transfer by testamentary devise. - - it can pass from one to another either by transfer intervivos or by testamentary devise, and the words of the bhagdari act do not expressly limit alienations to transactions inter vivos, and to so limit them would be to a large extent to defeat what is well known to be the object of the bhagdari act.basil scott, c.j.1. the only point which has been seriously argued in this case is whether the lower courts have erred in holding that the dispositions in the will amounted to an alienation contravening the provisions of the bhagdari act. the word 'alienation' ordinarily means an act in the law by which property passes from one to another. it can pass from one to another either by transfer intervivos or by testamentary devise, and the words of the bhagdari act do not expressly limit alienations to transactions inter vivos, and to so limit them would be to a large extent to defeat what is well known to be the object of the bhagdari act. we, therefore, affirm the decree and dismiss the appeal with costs.
Judgment:

Basil Scott, C.J.

1. The only point which has been seriously argued in this case is whether the lower Courts have erred in holding that the dispositions in the will amounted to an alienation contravening the provisions of the Bhagdari Act. The word 'alienation' ordinarily means an act in the law by which property passes from one to another. It can pass from one to another either by transfer intervivos or by testamentary devise, and the words of the Bhagdari Act do not expressly limit alienations to transactions inter vivos, and to so limit them would be to a large extent to defeat what is well known to be the object of the Bhagdari Act. We, therefore, affirm the decree and dismiss the appeal with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //