Purgash Rai, (Plaintiff), Appellant, versus Sheogobind,
tewarree, (Defendant), Respondent. Claim, to set
aside a sale of certain shares of an Estate, on the
grounds that, according to Hindoo Law, the seller
could not legally alienate the property. Lower
Court's dismissal of claim, as barred by lapse of time,
upheld, the argument of the appellant, that a condi-
tional sale is an incomplete transaction, and cannot
constitute a ground of action until the sale has
become absolute, being rejected, it being held that
the cause of action must be considered to have
arisen at the time of the transfer, the rendering of
the sale absolute being a mere consequence depending
upon the original transfer, and not a separate trans-
action by itself,
Balmokund, (Defendant), Appellant, versus Baboo Jankee
Dass, (Plaintiff), Respondent. Claim, laid in the
Zillah Court of Benares, to bring to sale certain
rights and interests in land situated in the district of
Mirzapore, which was decreed by the Zillah Court,
but reversed in appeal, it being held that the
suit was only cognizable in the Court of the Zillah in
which the property was situated, and in which the
defendant, as purchaser of the disputed property, is
resident,
Hurnam Rai and others, (Defendants), Appellants, versus
Bishumbur Rai and others, (Plaintiffs), Respondents.
Remanded, the decisions of the lower Court being
held to be incomplete and defective, as the plea of
champerty, advanced in those Courts by the defend-
ants, was left unadjusted,
Mewa Ram, (Defendant), Appellant, versus Rajah Teekum
Singh, (Plaintiff), Respondent. Plaintiff, as taloo-
quadar, sues for reversal of sale on account of arrears
of revenue, on ground that the parties held no pro-