Skip to content


Hira and anr. Vs. Kallu and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectContract;Property
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1885)ILR7All916
AppellantHira and anr.
RespondentKallu and ors.
Excerpt:
pre-emption - hindus--local custom--sale to a stranger. - .....to the land, i do not think that is a correct description. a community of hindus may agree to be governed by the custom of pre-emption, but the moment they sell to a stranger to the agreement, there is no pre-emption attaching to the land. i think there is no ground for declaring such a custom to exist. the judge was right in his decision, and this appeal must be dismissed with the costs.tyrrell, j.2. concurred.
Judgment:

W. Comer Petheram, C.J.

1. This appeal must be dismissed with costs. I agree with the learned Judge in his decision, but not altogether for the reasons assigned by him. The suit was based on a wrong idea as to the custom of pre-emption asserted by Hindus. Pre-emption is a right which is known to the Muhammadan Law. It is not fixed to the land or country, but follows the persons of Muhammadans wherever they may be in the world. Among Hindus, on the other hand, it is a matter of contract or custom agreed to by the members of a village or community. When it is said that such a custom is attached to the land, I do not think that is a correct description. A community of Hindus may agree to be governed by the custom of pre-emption, but the moment they sell to a stranger to the agreement, there is no pre-emption attaching to the land. I think there is no ground for declaring such a custom to exist. The Judge was right in his decision, and this appeal must be dismissed with the costs.

Tyrrell, J.

2. concurred.


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