AFSAR SHEIKH AND ANR. versus SOLEMAN BIBI AND ORS.
The Supreme Court held that the plaintiff failed to prove the appellant was in a position to dominate his will or exercised undue influence. The finding was not wrong or unreasonable and did not suffer from any legal defect. Therefore, the High Court had no jurisdiction to interfere in second appeal under sections 100, 101, and 103 C.P.C. The suit must fail as the requisite proof for undue influence was not established.
- Parties
- Appellant: Afsar Sheikh; Respondent: Soleman Bibi
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 06 November 1975
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Against the Judgment of Patna High Court
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; suit dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Undue Influence, Second Appeal, Hiba Bil Ewaz, Fraud, Misrepresentation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Afsar Sheikh
Appellant
Soleman Bibi
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Against the Judgment of Patna High Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the gift (Hiba-bil-Ewaz) was void due to undue influence, fraud, or misrepresentation
- 2 Whether the High Court had jurisdiction to interfere with findings of fact in second appeal
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court held that the plaintiff failed to prove the appellant was in a position to dominate his will or exercised undue influence. The finding was not wrong or unreasonable and did not suffer from any legal defect. Therefore, the High Court had no jurisdiction to interfere in second appeal under sections 100, 101, and 103 C.P.C. The suit must fail as the requisite proof for undue influence was not established.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; suit dismissed
Orders
- Judgment of the High Court set aside
- Suit of the plaintiff dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment