SAHU MADHO DAS AND OTHERS versus PANDIT MUKAND RAM AND ANOTHER

SAHU MADHO DAS AND OTHERS versus PANDIT MUKAND RAM AND ANOTHER

The Court held that the plaintiff, having unequivocally assented to the family arrangement with full knowledge of the facts and having accepted benefits under it, is precluded from avoiding the arrangement and cannot challenge the alienations or gifts made under said arrangement. The principle is that a reversioner who assents to an arrangement/gift with full knowledge, and derives benefit, is bound and cannot later repudiate it even though he was not then in titulo.

Parties
Appellants: Sahu Madho Das and others; Respondent No. 1: Pandit Mukand Ram; Respondent No. 2: Respondent No. 2 in Civil Appeal No. 94 of 1950
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
22 March 1955
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeals Nos. 92 and 94 of 1950 (arising From Original Suit Nos. 90 and 87 of 1931) / Supreme Court Appeal From Allahabad High Court (first Appeal Nos. 154 and 152 of 1934)
Outcome
Appeals allowed.
Legal Topics
Family Arrangement, Compromise, Reversioner's Assent, Estoppel, Alienation by Limited Owner, Proof of Family Arrangement, Succession
Family Law Property Law Family Arrangement Compromise Reversioner's Assent Estoppel Alienation by Limited Owner Proof of Family Arrangement +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sahu Madho Das and others

Appellants

Pandit Mukand Ram

Respondent No. 1

Respondent No. 2 in Civil Appeal No. 94 of 1950

Respondent No. 2

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeals Nos. 92 and 94 of 1950 (arising From Original Suit Nos. 90 and 87 of 1931) / Supreme Court Appeal From Allahabad High Court (first Appeal Nos. 154 and 152 of 1934)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a family arrangement can be inferred from the course of dealings between the parties and operates to confer title as claimed by one party.
  2. 2 Whether a reversioner who assents to an alienation/gift by a limited owner can later challenge it after accepting benefit under it.
  3. 3 What is the legal effect of assent by a reversioner given before he is in titulo (i.e. before succession opens out)?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the plaintiff, having unequivocally assented to the family arrangement with full knowledge of the facts and having accepted benefits under it, is precluded from avoiding the arrangement and cannot challenge the alienations or gifts made under said arrangement. The principle is that a reversioner who assents to an arrangement/gift with full knowledge, and derives benefit, is bound and cannot later repudiate it even though he was not then in titulo.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed.

Orders

  • Decrees of the High Court set aside.
  • Decrees of the first (trial) Court dismissing the plaintiff's claims in the relevant suits restored.