Skip to content


Puncham Lal and ors. Vs. Muhammad Yaqub Khan and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Reported inAIR1926All294
AppellantPuncham Lal and ors.
RespondentMuhammad Yaqub Khan and ors.
Excerpt:
- - it was really a question of technicality on which the suit of the plaintiffs failed because the power of attorney had not been filed......favour. the deed of gift was a registered document. but the learned munsif returned it because a marginal witness had not been called to prove it. the executant of the deed was a muhammadan and the registration was enough to give it validity. the document had bean proved otherwise than by the examination of a marginal witness. a further question was whether the father, who executed the document on behalf of his wife, had an authority. there was a mutation of names in favour of the minors. it was really a question of technicality on which the suit of the plaintiffs failed because the power of attorney had not been filed. in the circumstances i am not in a position to say that the judge in allowing the plaintiffs to withdraw their suit, acted without jurisdiction. he may have committed.....
Judgment:

Mukerji, J.

1. I do not think I should interfere in this case in revision. Certain minors brought a suit for recovery of a certain property on the strength of a deed of gift alleged to have been executed by their mother, who is said to be still alive, in their favour. The deed of gift was a registered document. But the learned Munsif returned it because a marginal witness had not been called to prove it. The executant of the deed was a Muhammadan and the registration was enough to give it validity. The document had bean proved otherwise than by the examination of a marginal witness. A further question was whether the father, who executed the document on behalf of his wife, had an authority. There was a mutation of names in favour of the minors. It was really a question of technicality on which the suit of the plaintiffs failed because the power of attorney had not been filed. In the circumstances I am not in a position to say that the Judge in allowing the plaintiffs to withdraw their suit, acted without jurisdiction. He may have committed an error of judgment and even of that I am not quite sure.

2. The petition is dismissed with costs which would include counsel's fees in this Court on the higher scale.


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