The Calcutta Weekly Notes Law Notes and Notes of Cases of the Calcutta High Court and of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and the English Law Courts Monday May 17 1920

Justice Walsh observed It is one of the convenient grounds adopted in a memorandum of appeal to say that it is contrary to rule or that the decision is contrary to law and the codes in this country in more than one place speak of matters being contrary to some rule having the force of law and lows an application based upon the ground that the previous order of the Court had been contrary to rule [...] 6 of the Bill the report of the Select Committee is as follows :— The only other change of substance is the omission of cl. [...] A perusal of the opinions recorded on the Bill leads us to the conclusion that there is no clear manifestation of opinion in favour of the retetion of the English rule laid down by the clause in question and we think in the absence of any consensus of opinion in favour of the rule that the clause should be omitted." In 1916 the Hindu Disposition of Property 'Act (Act XV of 1916) was passed [...] The result is that the law as settled by the decision of their Lordships of the Judicial Comittee in the case of Bhagabati Barmanya v. Kali Charan Singh remains unaffected even after the passing of the Hindu Disposition of Property Act 1916. [...] Where therefore there is a gift by a Hindu to a class of persons some of whom are or may be incapacitated from taking because not born at the date of the gift or at the date of death of the testator as the case may be and where there is no other objetion to the gift it should enure for the benefit of those members of the class who are capable of taking.