Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

A, alleging that he is the adopted son of X, sues B to recover certain property gran ted to him by X under a deed and forming part of the estate of X. The court finds that A is not the adopted son of X; but that he is entitled to the property under the deed and a decree is passed for A.

A, alleging that he is the adopted son of X, sues B to recover certain property gran ted to him by X under a deed and forming part of the estate of X. The court finds that A is not the adopted son of X; but that he is entitled to the property under the deed and a decree is passed for A. Correct Answer The finding that A is not the adopted son of X, will not operate as res judicata in a subsequent suit between A and B in which the question of adoption is again put in issue

Related Questions

A alleging that he is the adopted son of X, sues B to recover certain property granted to him by X, under a deed and forming part of X's estate. The court finds that A is not the adopted son of X, but he is entitled to the property under the deed and a decree is passed for A. The finding that A is not the adopted son of X:
A sues B in 1869 to recover a talukdari estate from him. The suit is dismissed on a finding that the estate had become the absolute property of B under a conditional sale made by A to B in 1853. A then sues B in 1875 for redemption of the same property, alleging that he had mortgaged the property as absolute owner thereof to B in 1854.
X sues A and B on a promissory note executed by A, B is A's nephew, and he is joined as a defendant on the ground that A and B are member of a joint Hindu family, and that the note was for a debt binding on the family. None of the defendant appears at the hearing and an ex parte decree is passed against both the defendants.
The decree against A proceeds on the ground that the note was passed by him and against B on the ground that the debt was incurred for a family purpose. B applies for an order to set aside the decree, alleging that the summons was not served upon him and that the debt in respect of which the note was passed by A was not incurred for a family purpose. It is not disputed that the amount was actually advanced to A.
A sues B to recover Rs. 1,000 alleged to be rent due under a lease executed by B. The court finds that B was in occupation of the premises during the period for which the rent is claimed, but that the alleged lease was not executed by B. At this stage A applies to amend his plaint by alleging that, though the lease was not executed by B, he is entitled to recover the amount for use and occupation of the premises.
A, alleging that he is the proprietor of a village, sues B, C and D for ejectment. The defence is that A is not the proprietor and that part of the village belongs to B, C and D, and the rest to X, Y and Z. The court finds that A is not the proprietor, and A's suit is dismissed. A then sues, X, Y and Z and also B, C and D for declaration that he is the proprietor of the village and for possession.
Evidence Act - An estate called "the Rampore tea estate" is sold by a deed which contains a map of the property sold. The fact that land not included in the map had always been regarded as part of the estate and was meant to pass by the deed, this fact-
Among 80 students, 24 passed in Chemistry, 35 passed in Physics and 29 passed in Mathematics, 8 students did not appear for the examination. If 2 students have passed in all the three subjects, 2 students have passed in Physics and Chemistry both but not in Mathematics, 2 students have passed in Chemistry and Mathematics both but not in Physics, and 8 students have passed in Physics and Mathematics both but not in Chemistry, then how many students have passed in Mathematics only?
A, a Hindu, claiming as the heir of his uncle, sues the executors of his uncle's widow for property left by the widow, alleging that the same belonged to the estate of his uncle, and that the widow had no power to dispose it off by will. The court holds that the widow had power to do away the property under the will.
A decree was transferred for its execution from Court X to Court Y. Court Y is of the opinion that Court X committed an error when it calculated the limitation period. Court Y announced that it rectified the mistake of Court X and upheld the rule of law by pronouncing judgment in favour of judgment debtor. This was challenged by the decree holder in the appellate court. Predict whether the decree holder will win the case.
Consider the following propositions:
1. A void marriage remains valid until a decree annulling it has been passed by a competent court.
2. A void marriage is never a valid marriage and there is no necessity of any decree annulling it.
3. A voidable marriage remains valid until a decree annulling it has been passed by a competent court.
4. Children born out of void marriage will get legal protection under section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on the basis of decree of nullity of such marriage.
Choose the correct option from below: