Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 100

Law: Evidence Act, (1 of 1872)

Section: 115

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)---- ----S. 100-Second appeal­ True effect of transaction-Question of law-Questions of estoppel and transaction being a family arrangement, missed by parties as welt as lower Courts-Questions taken notice of by High Court in Second appeal-Family arrangement, nature of-Evidence Act, (1 of 1872), S. 115. Two documents were executed between D and G by which .Ca undertook to finance and prosecute a suit for the benefit of both D and G, D requiring him to do so in return for D's agreement to forego his claim to a certain property in possession of G's son---A. In a suit between D as plaintiff and A as defendant, for D's share in the property in possession of A, the true effect of the aforesaid two documents giving rise to questions of estoppel and family arrangement between D and G was ignored in pleas of the defendant A, as well as, by the trial and lower appellate Courts, which had decreed D's suit against A. Held, on Second appeal that the true effect of a transaction was a pure question of law and could be taken notice of by the High Court. D could not lay claim to property in possession of A both by estoppel [Evidence Act (I of 1872), S. 115)] and by the application of the principle of family arrangement. Preservation of peace and amity between members of a family is the primary object of family settlements and is the true consideration upon which they are founded. An error of the parties, due either to mistake or ignorance of fact as to what their rights actually are, or on the points on which their rights actually depend, does not vitiate the family arrangement. Thakur Umrao Singh and another v. Thakur Lachhman Singh and another 15 C W N 497 and Mst. Hussain Bibi v. Fazal Qadir 1909 P L R 139 ref. JUDGMENT AKHLAQUE HUSAIN, J.------This second appeal arises out of a suit by the respondent Ditta for possession of 3/4th share of the lands specified in the plaint. The following pedigree will be helpful in appreciating the controversy between the parties :­ DALLI | ________________________|________________________ | | | Mast Waris Gohar | | | Ditta | Boota plaintiff-respondent 1 | | | Gulab | | | Muhammad Aslam | defendant 1- |…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492