RAM DHAN LAL AND OTHERS versus RADHE SHAM AND OTHERS

RAM DHAN LAL AND OTHERS versus RADHE SHAM AND OTHERS

The custom of dhar dhura, as proved by evidence, applies to cases where the river suddenly alters its course, but it cannot apply when the river has so changed its course that it no longer divides the villages. In such cases, the rights of the proprietors must be determined by Regulation XI of 1825, and original title prevails if identity of land remains. The High Court's conclusion on the scope of the custom was incorrect and the trial judge's decree is restored.

Parties
Appellant: Ram Dhan Lal and others; Respondent: Radhe Sham and others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 March 1951
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Judgment and Decree of the Allahabad High Court in First Appeal No. 473 of 1936
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of the trial judge restored; plaintiff No. 1 entitled to costs.
Legal Topics
Riparian Rights, Boundary Disputes, Customs Relating to Alluvion and Diluvion
Customary Law Property Law Riparian Rights Boundary Disputes Customs Relating to Alluvion and Diluvion

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ram Dhan Lal and others

Appellant

Radhe Sham and others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Judgment and Decree of the Allahabad High Court in First Appeal No. 473 of 1936

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the custom of dhar dhura applies to sudden changes in river course as well as gradual alluvial action
  2. 2 Whether the custom is reasonable and enforceable
  3. 3 Whether the custom applies when the river leaves the boundaries of the villages

Ratio Decidendi

The custom of dhar dhura, as proved by evidence, applies to cases where the river suddenly alters its course, but it cannot apply when the river has so changed its course that it no longer divides the villages. In such cases, the rights of the proprietors must be determined by Regulation XI of 1825, and original title prevails if identity of land remains. The High Court's conclusion on the scope of the custom was incorrect and the trial judge's decree is restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of the trial judge restored; plaintiff No. 1 entitled to costs.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Judgment of the trial judge restored