Skip to content


Baldeo Singh Vs. Ajudhia - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1885)ILR7All674
AppellantBaldeo Singh
RespondentAjudhia
Excerpt:
pre-emption - profits of property accruing between purchase and transfer to pre-emptor. - .....defendant against the plaintiff, when it was once established, existed, and must be presumed to have taken effect on the date when the subsequently awarded sale to the plaintiff took place, and therefore there was no period of time during which the plaintiff was properly in possession of the share, and entitled to profits from the defendant in his character of lambardar. it seems to me that the defendant must be presumed to have been in possession and entitled to the profits from the date of the sale to the plaintiff. the appeal is therefore decreed, and the suit dismissed with costs.tyrrell, j.2. concurred.
Judgment:

Straight, J.

1. I am of opinion that the appeal must prevail, and that the decision of the lower Courts must be reversed. It does not appear to me that the argument put forward in support of the plaintiff's claim will bear examination. The pre-emptive right which was declared in the suit instituted by the defendant against the plaintiff, when it was once established, existed, and must be presumed to have taken effect on the date when the subsequently awarded sale to the plaintiff took place, and therefore there was no period of time during which the plaintiff was properly in possession of the share, and entitled to profits from the defendant in his character of lambardar. It seems to me that the defendant must be presumed to have been in possession and entitled to the profits from the date of the sale to the plaintiff. The appeal is therefore decreed, and the suit dismissed with costs.

Tyrrell, J.

2. Concurred.


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