9911796707
TMI Blog1915 (7) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Muhammadan mistress named Jagmag Bibi, by whom he had two sons, and for whom he had made provision on a fairly liberal scale, and had given full possession thereof in 1876 and in 1888. On the 9th of June, 1887, the taluqdar purchased for ₹ 9,000 the bungalow in dispute in this action; he raised the purchase money by a mortgage on his own property and paid for it, and had the sole use and enjoyment of it for himself and his wives during his own life, but the deed of sale was made out and registered in Jagmag's name. The taluqdar spent money on the house, built a well and walls and kept a gardener in occupation, he and his wives lived there, and the mother of one of his wives lived and died there. His wives used the bungalow by his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the purchase money, and this again follows the analogy of our Common Law, that where a feoffment is made without consideration the use results to the feoffor. The exception in our law by way of advancement in favour of wife or child does not apply in India Gopeekrist Gosain v. Gungapersaud Gosain (1854) 6 Moo. I.A. 53 but the relationship is a circumstance which is taken into consideration in India in determining whether the transaction is benami or not. The general rule in India in the absence of all other relevant circumstances is thus stated by Lord Campbell in Dhurm Das Pandey v. Shama Soondri Dibiah (1843) 3 Moo. I.A. 229 : The criterion in these cases in India is to consider from what source the money comes with which the purchase m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hroughout benami. They are unable to agree with the opinion expressed by the High Court; they find no ground on which to treat a purchase by the taluqdar of such a property as this bungalow in the name of his Muhammmdan mistress in a manner differing from that on which a similar purchase by a Hindu in the name of a complete stranger would be treated, nor is there any ground for asserting that the probabilities of the case are in favour of an intention by the taluqdar to benefit his mistress ; for the reasons stated above the exact contrary appears to their Lordships to be the case. The High Court Judges attach great significance to the non-production of the books showing the accounts of the general estate, and appear to draw an inference ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntiff's gardener Bhairon, on her behalf and by her direction, and he regularly paid rent to her and applied to her to do all the necessary repairs; he has never given up possession to her although he duly received notice to quit, and he has denied her title. Section 116 of the Indian Evidence Act is perfectly clear on the point, and rests on the principle well established by many English cases, that a tenant who has been let into possession cannot deny his landlord's title, however defective it may be, so long as he has not openly restored possession by surrender to his landlord. The Subordinate Judge was clearly right on this point. The High Court appears to have been under some misapprehension, and counsel for the respondents have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
