Skip to content


Akbar Khan and ors. Vs. Lachman Rai and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1875)ILR1All440
AppellantAkbar Khan and ors.
RespondentLachman Rai and ors.
Excerpt:
manorial dues and cesses - feudal sustem--immemorial custom--what is best proof thereof--custom must be definite to be good--parol and documentary evidence. - cantonments act[c.a. no. 41/2006]. section 346 & cantonment fund (servants rules, 1937, rules 13, 14 & 15: [h.l. gokhale, ag. cj, p.v. hardas, naresh h. patil, r.m. borde & r.m. savant, jj] jurisdiction of school tribunal constituted under maharashtra employees of private schools (conditions of service) regulations act, (3 of 1978) held, school run by the cantonment board is a primary school and it is not a school recognised by any such board comparable to the divisional board or the state board. the school tribunal constituted under section 8 of the maharashtra act cannot entertain appeals filed under section 9 by the employees..........by the expression of opinion as to the existence, but by the enumeration of instances in which the alleged custom has been acted upon, and by the proof afforded by judicial or revenue records or private accounts and receipts that the custom has been enforced.2. it should also have been specifically determined on what castes or classes of tenants custom imposes a cess claimed if the existence of the custom is proved. again, acustom to be good must be definite, the size of the pot of sugar and the basket of cow-dung is left uncertain, as are also the times of rendering these alleged dues.3. that the claims may be more thoroughly tried, we set aside the decrees of both courts, and direct the court of first instance after framing specific issues to re-try the suit. the costs incurred.....
Judgment:
ORDER

Turner, J.

1. It is to be regretted that the Courts below have not inquired more fully before affirming the existence of customs of which some, although no doubt they at onetime obtained in certain parts of the country, appertained to the feudal system and are disappearing with that system.

2. In such cases it, is peculiarly incumbent on the Courts to try the existence of the custom regarding each cess as a separate issue, and to test the parol evidence given generally as to the existence of the custom by ascertaining on what grounds the opinion of each witness is based. The most cogent evidence of custom is not that which is afforded by the expression of opinion as to the existence, but by the enumeration of instances in which the alleged custom has been acted upon, and by the proof afforded by judicial or revenue records or private accounts and receipts that the custom has been enforced.

2. It should also have been specifically determined on what castes or classes of tenants custom imposes a cess claimed if the existence of the custom is proved. Again, acustom to be good must be definite, the size of the pot of sugar and the basket of cow-dung is left uncertain, as are also the times of rendering these alleged dues.

3. That the claims may be more thoroughly tried, we set aside the decrees of both Courts, and direct the Court of First Instance after framing specific issues to re-try the suit. The costs incurred hitherto will abide and follow the result.


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