Decided on December 06,1955

GULABCHAND Respondents


Shinde, C.J. - (1.) THIS is an application under Order 47 Rule 1 to review the decree of this Court dated 28 -2 -1955. Madh -B LJ 1955 HCR 747. The main ground pressed before us is that the parties are governed by Jain Law. It appears that in the trial Court the Defendant Milapchand had taken the plea that by a custom prevalent among the Jains, the adopted son takes equal share with the natural son. The trial Court found that the custom set up by the Defendant was not proved. The trial Court passed a preliminary decree. Against that decree the Defendant filed an appeal before the High Court. When the appeal carried up for hearing, the parties admitted that they are governed by the Beneras School of Hindu law. The question that a custom prevails among the Jains to the effect that adopted son takes equally with the natural son was never raised in the High Court. In these circumstances this review application is not competent. The application is passed on the ground that the parties are governed by the Jain Law. There is no such thing as Jain Law. There may be custom prevalent among the Jains which is not followed by the Hindus but, as already stated, the custom pleaded by the Defendant was not proved and in appeal no question regarding this special custom was raised at the time of arguments. In these circumstances the point raised in the review application cannot be said to be a discovery of a new and important matter nor can it be said to be a mistake or an error apparent on the face of the record.
(2.) THIS review -application, therefore, has no force. Accordingly it is rejected. Dixit, J. I agree.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.