{"id":236757,"date":"1988-08-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1988-08-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988"},"modified":"2018-05-26T22:16:27","modified_gmt":"2018-05-26T16:46:27","slug":"budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988","title":{"rendered":"Budhu Mal Etc vs Mahablr Prasad & Ors., Etc on 5 August, 1988"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Budhu Mal Etc vs Mahablr Prasad & Ors., Etc on 5 August, 1988<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1988 AIR 1772, \t\t 1988 SCR Supl. (2) 238<\/div>\n
Author: N Ojha<\/div>\n
Bench: Ojha, N.D. (J)<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nBUDHU MAL ETC.,\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nMAHABlR PRASAD & ORS., ETC.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT05\/08\/1988\n\nBENCH:\nOJHA, N.D. (J)\nBENCH:\nOJHA, N.D. (J)\nPATHAK, R.S. (CJ)\nSHARMA, L.M. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1988 AIR 1772\t\t  1988 SCR  Supl. (2) 238\n 1988 SCC  (4) 194\t  JT 1988 (3)\t281\n 1988 SCALE  (2)294\n\n\nACT:\n    Provincial\tSmall  Cause  Courts  Act-  Section  23\t of-\nLandlord- Tenant dispute- Determination of title to property\nlet  out-  Whether landlord can unilaterally cancel  a\tdeed\ngiving to another party benefits arising out of property let\nout whether section 23 is attracted in the case.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n    These  appeals  were preferred by  tenants\tagainst\t the\njudgment of the High Court in civil revisions.\n    Respondent Mahabir Prasad had executed a registered deed\ndated  8th  December,  1966  with  regard  to  premises\t  in\nquestion,  giving  the\tbenefits arising  out  of  the\tsaid\nproperties to his grandsons and their mother Smt.  Sulochana\nDevi.  He  informed the tenants to make payment of  rent  to\nSmt.  Sulochana\t Devi  in terms of  the\t said  deed.  Later,\nMahabir\t Prasad executed a registered deed  of\tcancellation\ndated  3rd  November, 1970, cancelling\tthe  aforesaid\tdeed\ndated  8th  December, 1966 and debarring the  grandsons\t and\ntheir mother from the right to realise rent and informed the\ntenants about the said deed of cancellation.\n    Subsequently,  Mahabir  Prasad instituted suits  in\t the\nCourt  of  the Judge, Small Causes  against  the  appellant-\ntenants\t for recovery of arrears of rent and their  eviction\non  the ground that in spite of their being informed of\t the\ndeed  of  cancellation, they had not paid rent to  him.\t The\nappellants contended that the deed dated 8th December, 1966,\ncould  not be unilaterally cancelled by Mahabir Prasad,\t and\nthe  rent  claimed by him had already been paid by  them  to\nSmt. Sulochana Devi. The title of Mahabir Prasad to  realise\nrent  was disputed by the appellants who had contended\tthat\nthe suit involving a question of title was not cognizable by\na  Court of Small Causes. The Judge, Small  Causes,  decreed\nthe  suits.  The  appellants  filed  revisions\tbefore\t the\nDistrict  Judge\t who dismissed the same.  Further  revisions\nfiled  by  the\tappellants  in\tthe  High  Court  were\talso\ndismissed.  The\t appellants moved this Court for  relief  by\nspecial leave against the Judgments of the High Court.\n\t\t\t\t\t\t  PG NO 238\n\t\t\t\t\t\t  PG NO 239\nAllowing the appeals, the Court,\n    HELD:  The\tprovisions of section 23 of  the  Provincial\nSmall  Cause Courts Act (the Act) were clearly attracted  in\nthese cases and the plaints in the cases ought to have\tbeen\nreturned for presentation to a Court having jurisdiction  to\ndetermine  the\ttitle. It is true that Section 23  does\t not\nmake  it  obligatory  on  the  Court  of  Small\t Causes\t  to\ninvariably   return the plaint once a question of  title  is\nraised\tby the tenant, and that in a suit instituted by\t the\nlandlord  against  his tenant on the basis  of\tcontract  of\ntenancy, a question of title could also incidentally be gone\ninto and that any finding recorded by a Judge, Small Causes,\nin this behalf could not be res judicata in a suit based  on\ntitle, but it cannot be gainsaid that in enacting section 23\nthe Legislature must have had in contemplation some cases in\nwhich  the  discretion\tto return the  plaint  ought  to  be\nexercised  in  order  to do  complete  justice\tbetween\t the\nparties. On facts, these are cases in which~ in order to do'\ncomplete  justice between the parties the plaints  ought  to\nhave  been  returned  for presentation\tto  a  court  having\njurisdiction  to  determine the title so that  none  of\t the\nparties was prejudiced. [242E, H, 243A-C, F]\n    Judgments and decrees of the courts below were set aside\nand  the  Judge,  Small Causes was directed  to\t return\t the\nplaints\t of  the cases for presentation to  the\t appropriate\nCourt as contemplated by section 23 of the Act. [243F-G]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 1271 and
\n1272 of 1978.\n<\/p>\n
    From  the  Judgment\t and Order dated  18.4.1978  of\t the
\nAllahabad  High Court in Civil Revision Nos. 161 and 163  of
\n1975.\n<\/p>\n
    G.L.  Sanghi,  K.B.\t Rohtagi and Praveen  Jain  for\t the
\nAppellants.  Satish Chandra Aggarwal, S.K.  Dhingra,  Pramod
\nSwarup, S.K. Mehta and Aman Vachhar for the Respondents.
\n    The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\n    OJHA,  J.  These  appeals by  special  leave  have\tbeen
\npreferred  by  tenants\tof  certain  premises  against\t the
\njudgment of the Allahabad High Court dismissing their  civil
\nrevisions.\n<\/p>\n
    The\t facts in a nutshell necessary for the\tdecision  of
\nthese  appeals\tare that one Mahabir Prasad had let out\t the
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t  PG NO 240
\npremises in question to the  appellants. It appears that  on
\n28th  November,\t 1966  Sukmal Chand  alias  Lalloo,  son  of
\nMahabir\t Prasad was murdered leaving Smt.  Sulochna Devi  as
\nhis widow and two sons Sanjeev Kumar alias Teetu  aged 1-1\/2
\nyears  and Rajeev Kumar alias Cookoo aged 3  years.  Mahabir
\nPrasad\ton  8th December, 1966 executed\t a  registered\tdeed
\nwith regard to certain properties including the premises  in
\nquestion   which he described as his own by using the  words
\n“out  of my property”. The nature of the deed  would  appear
\nfrom the following recital contained therein:\n<\/p>\n
    “I\tgive  the  benefits arising out\t of  the  above-said
\nproperty  to my grand sons Rajeev Kumar alias Cookoo aged  3
\nyears,\tand Sanjeev Kumar alias Teetu aged 1-1\/2  years\t S\/o
\nSukmal\tChand and Guardian Smt. Sulochna Devi mother of\t the
\nchildren,   residents  of  Town\t Sardhana.  Therefore\tSmt.
\nSulochna Devi will be able to maintain herself and her\tborn
\nand  unborn children from the rent realized from the  above-
\nsaid three shops and she will use the house as her residence
\nand with her I and my wife Sunheri Devi will live throughout
\nlife.  Smt. Sulochna Devi will neither be able\tto  transfer
\nthese  shops  and house nor to mortgage\t them  by  borrowing
\nmoney. She will have the right to maintain her children only
\nwith the benefit arising from them. I will neither interfere
\nwith her right nor transfer the ownership of this  property.
\nHence this Parivarik Vayawastha Patra i.e. family settlement
\nhas been scribed. dated 8 December. 1966.”\n<\/p>\n
    It\tfurther appears that after executing the  said\tdeed
\nMahabir\t Prasad\t informed  the\ttenants\t concerned  to\tmake
\npayment\t of  rent  to Smt. Sulochna Devi  in  terms  of\t the
\naforesaid   deed  and  the  tenants  started   paying\trent
\naccordingly. Mahabir Prasad, however, subsequently  executed
\na  deed of cancellation dated 3rd November, 1970. This\tdeed
\ntoo  was registered and Mahabir Prasad thereby purported  to
\ncancel the deed dated t3th December, 1966 for reasons stated
\ntherein. In this deed Mahabir Prasad inter alia stated\tthat
\nby  the deed dated 8th December, 1966 written in  favour  of
\nSanjeev\t Kumar\talias Teetu and Rajeev Kumar  alias  Cookoo,
\nguardian Smt. Sulochna Devi mother had been given the  right
\nto realise rent and that the deed of cancellation  “debarred
\nthem  from  the right to realising the\trent”.\tThe  tenants
\nwere informed about the deed of cancellation also.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t  PG NO 241
\n    Subsequently  suits\t were instituted by  Mahabir  Prasad
\nagainst the appellants for recovery of arrears of rent\tetc.
\nand their eviction from the premises in their tenancy on the
\nground\tthat notwithstanding being informed of the  deed  of
\ncancellation  they  had\t not paid rent to him  and  were  in
\narrears.  One  of  the\tpleas  raised  in  defence  by\t the
\nappellants was that the deed dated 8th December, 1966  could
\nnot  be\t unilaterally  cancelled by Mahabir  Prasad  by\t the
\nsubsequent  deed dated 3rd November, 1970 and that the\trent
\nclaimed by Mahabir Prasad to be in arrears had already\tbeen
\npaid by them to Smt. Sulochna Devi. In other words, title of
\nMahabir\t Prasad\t to  realise rent from\tthe  appellants\t was
\ndisputed  by them. Smt. Sulochna Devi was also arrayed as  a
\ndefendant in these suits. She seems to have filed a  written
\nstatement  acknowleding receipt of rent claimed\t by  Mahabir
\nPrasad as arrears from the appellants.\n<\/p>\n
    The pleas raised by. the appellants in their defence did
\nnot find favour with the Judge, Small Causes in whose  court
\nthe  suits  were  filed\t and  consequently  the\t suits\twere
\ndecreed. The appellants filed revisions before the  District
\nJudge and on these revisions being dismissed the  appellants
\nfiled further revisions before the High Court which too were
\ndismissed.  It is against these judgments of the High  Court
\nthat  these appeals have been preferred. With regard to\t the
\ndeed  dated 8th December, 1966 it has been held that by\t the
\nsaid  deed  only a permission bad been\tgranted\t by  Mahabir
\nPrasad to Smt. Sulochna Devi to realise rent and to maintain
\nherself and her two children and that it did not amount to a
\ntransfer  of immovable property in favour of  Smt.  Sulochna
\nDevi.  It  has further been held that in this  view  of\t the
\nmatter Mahabir Prasad was competent to revoke the permission
\ngranted to Smt. Sulochna Devi. The other plea that the\tsuit
\ninvolved  a  question  of title\t and  consequently  was\t not
\ncognizable  by\ta court of small causes also did not,  as  a
\nconsequence  of the aforesaid finding, find favour with\t the
\ncourts below.\n<\/p>\n
    It has been urged by learned counsel for the  appellants
\nthat by the deed dated 8th December, 1966 the right to\trent
\nand  not only the right to realise the rent was\t transferred
\nand  this right was described in the deed by saying “I\tgive
\nthe  benefits  arising\tout  of\t the  abovesaid\t  property”.
\nAccording  to  learned\tcounsel\t benefits  arising  out\t  of
\nimmovable   property  themselves  partook  the\t nature\t  of
\nimmovable property and the said deed having been acted upon,
\nit was not open to Mahabir Prasad to unilaterally cancel the
\nbenefits  conferred on Smt. Sulochna Devi and her  sons,  by
\nthe subsequent deed.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t  PG NO 242
\n    Learned counsel appearing for the landlord on the  other
\nhand  urged that the courts below have\trightly\t interpreted
\nthe  deed  dated  3th December, 1966 to be  one\t which\tonly
\ngranted\t the permission to realise rent and the plea  raised
\nby the tenants did not involve any question of title.
\n    Having  heard learned counsel for the parties we are  of
\nthe  opinion  that  on the facts of  the  instant  case\t the
\nprovisions  of\tSection 23  of the  Provincial\tSmall  Cause
\nCourts Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) are  clearly
\nattracted and the plaints of these cases ought to have\tbeen
\nreturned for presentation to a court having jurisdiction  to
\ndetermine the title. Section 23 reads as hereunder:\n<\/p>\n
    “23.  Return of plaints in suits involving questions  of
\ntitle :\n<\/p>\n
    (1) Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing portion of
\nthis  Act,  when  the right of a plaintiff  and\t the  relief
\nclaimed\t by him in a Court of Small Causes depend  upon\t the
\nproof or disproof of a title to immovable property or  other
\ntitle which such a Court cannot finally determine, the Court
\nmay at any stage of the proceedings return the plaint to  be
\npresented  to a Court having jurisdiction to  determine\t the
\ntitle.\n<\/p>\n
    (2) When a Court returns a plaint under sub-section (1),
\nit shall comply with the provisions of the second  paragraph
\nof  section 57 of the Code of Civil Procedure ( 14 of  1982)
\nand  make such order with respect to costs as it deems\tjust
\nand  the  Court\t shall,\t for  the  purposes  of\t the  Indian
\nLimitation  Act,  1877 (15 of 1877) be deemed to  have\tbeen
\nunable\tto  entertain  the suit by reason of a\tcause  of  a
\nnature like to that of defect of jurisdiction.
\n    With regard to the applicability of Section 23 aforesaid
\nthe High Court has taken the view that the said section gave
\na  discretion  to  a court to return or not  to\t return\t the
\nplaint where a question of title is raised and did not debar
\nit  from  deciding  the suit. If in a  particular  case\t the
\nJudge,\tSmall  Causes  did not exercise\t his  discretion  to
\nreturn\t the  plaint  the  said\t discretion  could  not\t  be
\ninterfered with in a civil revision.\n<\/p>\n
    It\tis true that Section 23 does not make it  obligatory
\non the court of small causes to invariably return the plaint
\nonce a question of title is raised by the tenant. It is also
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t  PG NO 243
\ntrue  that in a suit instituted by the landlord against\t his
\ntenant\ton the basis of contract of tenancy, a\tquestion  of
\ntitle  could  also incidentally be gone into  and  that\t any
\nfinding\t recorded  by a Judge, Small Causes in\tthis  behalf
\ncould  not  be\tres judicata in a suit based  on  title.  It
\ncannot, however, be gainsaid that in enacting Section 23 the
\nLegislature  must  have had in contemplation some  cases  in
\nwhich  the  discretion\tto return the  plaint  ought  to  be
\nexercised  in  order  to do  complete  justice\tbetween\t the
\nparties.  On  the facts of the instant cases  we  feel\tthat
\nthese  are  such  cases in which in  order  to\tdo  complete
\njustice\t between the parties the plaints ought to have\tbeen
\nreturned for presentation to a court having jurisdiction  to
\ndetermine  the\ttitle.\tIn  case the  plea  set\t up  by\t the
\nappellants  that  by the deed dated 8th December,  1966\t the
\nbenefit\t arising  out  of immovable  property  which  itself
\nconstituted  immovable\tproperty  was  transferred  and\t  in
\npursuance  of  the information conveyed in  this  behalf  by
\nMahabir Prasad to them the appellants started paying rent to
\nSmt.  Sulochna\tDevi  and that the said deed  could  not  be
\nunilaterally  cancelled, is accepted, it is likely not\tonly
\nto  affect the title of Mahabir Prasad to realise rent\tfrom
\nthe  appellants but will also have the effect\tof  snapping
\neven  the  relationship\t of  landlord  and  tenant.  between
\nMahabir\t Prasad\t ‘and  the appellants  which  could  not  he
\nrevived by the subsequent unilateral cancellation by Mahabir
\nPrasad\tof the said deed dated 8th December, 1966.  In\tthat
\nevent  it  may not he possible to treat the suits  filed  by
\nMahabir\t Prasad against the appellants to be  suits  between
\nlandlord and tenant simpliciter based on contract of tenancy
\nin  which an issue of title was incidentally raised. If\t the
\nsuits  cannot  be construed to be one between  landlord\t and
\ntenant\tthey  would not be cognizable by a  court  of  small
\ncauses\tand  it\t is for these reasons that  we\tare  of\t the
\nopinion that these are such cases where the plaints ought to
\nhave been returned for presentation to appropriate court  so
\nthat none of the parties was prejudiced.\n<\/p>\n
    In\tthe result. both these appeals are allowed  and\t the
\njudgments and decrees of the courts below are set aside\t and
\nthe Judge, Small Causes is directed to return the plaints of
\nthese two cases for presentation to the appropriate court as
\ncontemplated  by Section 23 of the Act. The amount  of\trent
\nwhich  may have been deposited by the appellants in  any  of
\nthe  courts  below  in these suits shall,  however.  not  be
\nrefunded  to  the  appellants  and  shall  be  disbursed  in
\naccordance with the decision of the appropriate civil court.
\nIn  case the dispute about title is settled by\tthe  parties
\namicably,  the aforesaid amount of rent can be disbursed  in
\npursuance  of  such  amicable settlement  also.\t We  further
\ndirect\tthat the tenant-appellants shall, till\tthe  dispute
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t  PG NO 244
\nabout  title  is  decided or settled, deposit  rent  of\t the
\npremises in their tenancy regularly as contemplated by\tsub-
\nsection\t (2)  of  Section 30 of\t the  U.P.  Urban  Buildings
\n(Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1977. In the
\ncircumstances of the case, the parties shall bear their\t own
\ncosts throughout.\n<\/p>\n
S.L.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t    Appeals allowed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Budhu Mal Etc vs Mahablr Prasad & Ors., Etc on 5 August, 1988 Equivalent citations: 1988 AIR 1772, 1988 SCR Supl. (2) 238 Author: N Ojha Bench: Ojha, N.D. (J) PETITIONER: BUDHU MAL ETC., Vs. RESPONDENT: MAHABlR PRASAD & ORS., ETC. DATE OF JUDGMENT05\/08\/1988 BENCH: OJHA, N.D. (J) BENCH: OJHA, N.D. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-236757","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nBudhu Mal Etc vs Mahablr Prasad & Ors., Etc on 5 August, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Budhu Mal Etc vs Mahablr Prasad & Ors., Etc on 5 August, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1988-08-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-26T16:46:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Budhu Mal Etc vs Mahablr Prasad & Ors., Etc on 5 August, 1988\",\"datePublished\":\"1988-08-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-26T16:46:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988\"},\"wordCount\":1924,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988\",\"name\":\"Budhu Mal Etc vs Mahablr Prasad & Ors., Etc on 5 August, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1988-08-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-26T16:46:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Budhu Mal Etc vs Mahablr Prasad & Ors., Etc on 5 August, 1988\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Budhu Mal Etc vs Mahablr Prasad & Ors., Etc on 5 August, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Budhu Mal Etc vs Mahablr Prasad & Ors., Etc on 5 August, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1988-08-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-26T16:46:27+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Budhu Mal Etc vs Mahablr Prasad & Ors., Etc on 5 August, 1988","datePublished":"1988-08-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-26T16:46:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988"},"wordCount":1924,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988","name":"Budhu Mal Etc vs Mahablr Prasad & Ors., Etc on 5 August, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1988-08-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-26T16:46:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/budhu-mal-etc-vs-mahablr-prasad-ors-etc-on-5-august-1988#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Budhu Mal Etc vs Mahablr Prasad & Ors., Etc on 5 August, 1988"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/236757","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=236757"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/236757\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=236757"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=236757"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=236757"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}