Case Details

Citation(s)
1960 SLG 269 1960 SLD 269 1960 PLD 179
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 4-D of 1958, decided on 2nd February 1960.
MUHAMMAD MUNIR, C.J., A. R. CORNELIUS, AMIRUDDIN AHMAD AND S. A. RAHMAN, JJ
P. C. Pakrasi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court, (S. C. Basu, Advocate Supreme Court with him), instructed by A. N. M. Nazir-ud-Din, Attorney for Appellant. R. R. Guha, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (S. R. Pal, Advocate Supreme Court with him); instructed b

SURENDRA LAL DFPAL--Appellant

VS

SATYA TAMAJ GHOSHAL and others--Respondents

Law:

Section:

Alluvion and diluvion-Accretion by recession of channel whose bed is privately owned-Principle as to ownership of accretion­---Tenant whether can lay claim to such, land which is contiguous with his tenancy-Bengal Regulation (1 of 1825), S. 4 (1). If diluviated land be freely left again by the reffux and recess of the sea, the owner may have his land as before, if he can make out where and what it was ; for he cannot lose his property of the soil, although it for a time becomes part of the sea, and within the Admiral's jurisdiction while it so continues. This principle is one not merely of English Law, not a principle peculiar to any system of municipal law, but it is a principle founded in universal law and justice, that is to say that whoever has land, wherever it is, whatever may be the accident to which it has been exposed, whether it be a vineyard which is covered by lava or ashes from a volcano, or a field covered by the sea or by a river, the ground, the site, the property , remains in the original owner. The rule thus stated has remained unshaken during the last century and has been repeatedly re-affirmed the only qualification added to the rule being that the owner may lose his title to such land by abandonment, dereliction or, prescription. Where a tenant holds under a stranger land to which there has been imperceptible accretion by the recession of a privately owned river neither he nor his landlord can lay any claim to the accretion as against the owner of the bed of the river, and where the tenant holds under the owner of the bed of the river' his position, in the absence of an express statutory provision, should not be different, the tenant should not be able to claim a sort of statutory tenancy against his own landlord. If in one case, there is confiscation of another man's property, it is equally so in the other, though only of an interest in property. Felix Lopez v. Muddun Mohun Thakoor and 2 others 13 Moors I A 467 ref. Khubimahton v. Mahant Lachmidas I -L R 2 Pat. 18 dissented from. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD MUNIR, C. J.----This is a certificated appeal from a decree of a Division Bench of the High Court of East Pakistan at Dacca reversing a decree…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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