|
Banga Chandra v Jagat Kishore
|
[1916] PC 110
|
|
United Kingdom
|
circa 1916
|
|
|
 13 
|
|
Air 1916 PC 110
|
AIR 1916 PC 110
|
Privy Council
|
India
|
circa 1916
|
|
|
7
|
|
[1916] PC 110-44
|
[1916] PC 110-44
|
|
United Kingdom
|
circa 1916
|
|
|
2
|
|
[1916] PC 110-36
|
[1916] PC 110-36
|
|
United Kingdom
|
circa 1916
|
|
|
|
|
Sham Sundar Lad v Achhan ' mentioned in Schs 1 and 2, the decision Kunwar (4) and Deputy Commissioner a of the Courts below turned entirely Kheri v Khan j an Singh (3) The reci upon the conclusions arrived at by them tals in the document evidencing aliena as to whether there was legal necessity tion may raise a presumption, and some for the sale evidenced by the kabala of times a very strong presumption of 1299 B S , Ex E in the case, on which necessity in favour of a purchaser in the title of the defendants was based the circumstances of a particular case, The kabala recited that, at the time specially when evidence of a tran when the document was executed Gola saction is not available As a gene-, keshwari and Kunjakishore had
|
|
Privy Council
|
India
|
circa 1916
|
|
|
|
