{"id":72315,"date":"1971-08-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1971-08-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971"},"modified":"2019-01-22T11:09:16","modified_gmt":"2019-01-22T05:39:16","slug":"kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971","title":{"rendered":"Kutubuddin Ahammed And Ors. vs Kashim Ali And Anr. on 10 August, 1971"},"content":{"rendered":"
Calcutta High Court<\/div>\n
Kutubuddin Ahammed And Ors. vs Kashim Ali And Anr. on 10 August, 1971<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: AIR 1972 Cal 293, 76 CWN 57<\/div>\n
Author: A K Mookerji<\/div>\n
Bench: A K Mookerji<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
 Amiya Kumar Mookerji, J. <\/p>\n
 1. This Rule was obtained by the petitioners against an appellate order of the learned Munsif, rejecting the petitioners’ application for pre-emption under Section 8(1) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955.\n<\/p>\n
 2. One Hazi Fakiruddin, since deceased, the father of the petitioners Nos. 1-7 and husband of petitioner No. 8, was a co-sharer tenant with respect to the land in khaitan No. 235 in mouja Chandpur in the district of Malda. The opposite party No. 4, another co-sharer, on 5th of April, 1965, transferred. 223\/4th acre of land out of the lands in the aforesaid khaitan to opposite party nos. 1-3, who are neither co-sharers nor raiyats possessing adjoining land of the said khaitan, for a consideration of a copy of Holi koran, under a deed described as “Heba-bil-ewaz”. For the purpose of registration the said deed was valued at Rs. 1,000\/-. The said Hazi Fakiruddin, thereafter, made an application on 11th of June, 1965, to the Revenue Officer praying pre-emption under<\/p>\n
Section 8(1) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), with respect to the above transferred land and deposited Rs. 1,000\/- together with 10% interest. On 2nd of September, 1967, the Revenue Officer dismissed the said application upon the view that Heba-bil-ewaz is a gift for consideration, it may be a sale in reality but it is a gift in form. The pre-emptee took an appeal against the said order of the Revenue Officer. During the pendency of the said appeal, the said Hazi Fakiruddin died and the petitioners were substituted in place and stead of the deceased pre-emptee. The learned Munsif by his order dated 30th November, 1968, dismissed the petitioners’ appeal holding that the transaction was a gift and as such, it was exempted from pre-emption under Sub-section (2) (b) of Section 8 of the Act. The petitioners, being aggrieved, against the said order of the learned Munsif, moved this Court on an application under Article 227 of the Constitution and obtained the present Rule.\n<\/p>\n
 3. Mr. Roy, the learned Advocate, appearing in support of the Rule, contended that the learned Munsif and the Revenue Officer were in error in holding that Heba-bil-ewaz was a gift, pure and simple; and, therefore, the transfer under such a deed, was exempted from pre-emption under the exception in Sub-section (2) (b) of Section 8 of the Act Mr. Roy submitted that Heba-bil-ewaz as understood in India, is nothing more than a sale as has been held by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as well as many of the decisions of this Court In support of his contentions Mr. Roy referred to a number of decisions.\n<\/p>\n
 4. It is submitted that a Heba-bil-ewaz, as distinguished from a Heba or a simple gift, is a gift for consideration. It is in reality a sale, and has all the incidents of a contract of sale. As a sale, it also gives rise to the right of pre-emption (Vide, Satyendra Nath Roy Choudhury v. Fulsom Bibi, 36 Cal WN 486 = (AIR 1932 Cal 625)). Where the property covered under a Haba-bil-ewaz is immovable and is of the value of Rs. 100\/- and upward, it must be affected by a registered instrument as required under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act which relates to sales. (Vide, Abbasali v. Karim Bash, (1909) 13 Cal WN 160). The true characteristic of Heba-bil-ewaz has been explained in Saraffuddin Mohd. v. Mohinddin Mohd., ILR 54 Cal 754 (757) = (AIR 1927 Cal 808). It is observed at p. 766, that the transaction falsely termed in India as Heba-bil-ewaz is not governed by the Mohammedan Law of Heba, but is amenable to the General Law in India relating to the contracts and the Transfer of Property. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, in Ranee Khujooroonissa v. Mst. Roushen Jehan, (1876) 3 Ind App 291 (PC) observed at p. 308, that a consideration for Heba-bil-ewaz may be perfectly valid which is wholly inadequate in amount when compared with the thing given. Some of the cases have gone so far as to say that even a gift of a ring may be a sufficient consideration. In Jerafat Mondal v. Kamrezvan Bibi, ILR (1955) 1 Cal 144, it is held that a Heba-bil-ewaz should be regarded as a sale, whatever might be the value given in exchange of the property transfered. Koran Sarif, a string of bed or a carpet is a good consideration for a Heba-bil-ewaz. Accordingly, Mr. Roy submitted that a copy of Holt Koran in the instant case, is a good consideration for a Heba-bil-ewaz, it should be regarded as a sale and not a gift within the exception under Sub-section (2) (b) of Section 8 of the Act. Therefore, the Tribunals below illegally exercised its jurisdiction in rejecting the petitioners’ application for pre-emption.\n<\/p>\n
 5.        Mr.   Sen,   the   learned   Advocate appearing   on behalf of   the  opposite party, contended that a   copy   of   Koran  or a car-pet   might be   a   valid   consideration   for     a Heba-bil-ewaz   but   unless   the   consideration was in the term of money, there could not be a sale, and when there was no sale, provisions of Section 8(1) of the Act are not attracted.     In   this   connection   Mr.  Sen   referred to a decision of the Supreme Court, Commr.   of  Income-tax,   Andhra   Pradesh  v. Motors   and   General   Stores   (P.)   Ltd.,   AIR 1968   SC 200, wherein the Supreme Court has laid down the essential elements   in     a transaction   of sale.    Mr.   Sen further     contended   that Heba-bil-ewaz is a  gift  for   a consideration.    So   it   is a kind of gift. The exception  provided  in Section 8(2)   is   for a  gift without  any  qualification  or   restriction.    The   expression   “any   pecuniary   consideration”   occurring   in   Sub-section   (e)   of Section 26F   (1)   of  the   Bengal   Tenancy Act includes and   Connotes all   consideration either in the shape  of cash money or other materials   having   a   pecuniary      value   but such  expression  is   absent  in   Section 8(1) of   the   Act.    The   said   section      provides that   on   deposit   of   consideration       money, an   application   for      pre-emption      can   be made.    So  the word    transfer”  occurred   in Section  8(1) of the Act must be a transfer  for  consideration   of  money   and not   a transfer for any  other consideration.\n<\/p>\n
 6. In AIR 1968 SC 200, the Supreme Court held that the presence of money consideration is an essential element in a transaction of sale. If the consideration is not money but some other valuable consideration it may be an exchange or a Barter but not a sale.\n<\/p>\n
 7. The chief characteristic of a gift is, that it is a transfer without consideration. Gift is defined in Section 122 of the Transfer of Property Act, as “the transfer of certain existing movable or immovable property made voluntarily and with-out consideration”. So, Heba-bil-ewaz is not a gift and therefore, in my opinion, it does not come within the exception under Sub-section (2) (b) of Section 8 of the Act.\n<\/p>\n
 8.       The next point that  remains for determination    is,   whether        Heba-bil-ewaz is a sale.   It is well settled that  Heba-bil-ewaz  is   a sale when  the   consideration     is money.    In   ILR   54     Cal      754   (757)    = (AIR   1927   Cal 808) there was a deed by Mohammadan   lady  purporting     to   transfer certain property   in consideration   of donee’s paying her a fixed  annual sum of maintenance.    It   was    held    that   the      transaction was one of a sale and not a “Heba” in any form.    In   another case  referred   to by Mr. Roy,  36   Cal   WN 486   =   (AIR  1932 Cal 625),   Heba-bil-ewaz  was   executed  in   consideration   of   donee’s   executing      in   favour of the   donor another   deed by which     the donee   agreed  to   pay  Rs.   5\/-  per   month for   donor’s   maintenance,      the     transaction was   held to be a sale so as   to attract  the provisions   of   Section   26F   of  the   Bengal   Tenancy Act.    The cases  of  pre-emption under Section   26F  of the  Bengal   Tenancy     Act may   be   distinguished   from  Section 8     of the   Act,   because   “any   pecuniary   consideration”   occurring     in  that section might include consideration in   land. But in the instant   case,   considering   the  nature   of    the transaction, it   cannot be said that the said transaction   was  a   sale   because   admittedly there   was   no   consideration   of   money.    In view   of the above decision of the Supreme Court,   the      transaction      is   either an   exchange   or   a   Barter.    A   transfer      by   exchange  is   exempted    under   Sub-section   (2) (a)  of   Section 8  of   the Act.    A  Barter is also   to   give   in  exchange   for  some     other commodities,   it is   another name  of an exchange.    Therefore,   I hold that  the     petitioners’  application   for  pre-emption is     not maintainable   under   Section 8(1)    of     the Act as   the transfer  in the instant   case    is by an exchange under a   Heba-bil-ewaz and it   is   within   the  exception   provided  for, in Sub-section   (2) (a) of Section 8   of the  Act.\n<\/p>\n
 9.        In   the  result,   this   Rule  is discharged.\n<\/p>\n
 10.       There will be no   order as   to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Calcutta High Court Kutubuddin Ahammed And Ors. vs Kashim Ali And Anr. on 10 August, 1971 Equivalent citations: AIR 1972 Cal 293, 76 CWN 57 Author: A K Mookerji Bench: A K Mookerji ORDER Amiya Kumar Mookerji, J. 1. This Rule was obtained by the petitioners against an appellate order of the learned Munsif, rejecting […]<\/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":[22,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-72315","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-calcutta-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nKutubuddin Ahammed And Ors. vs Kashim Ali And Anr. on 10 August, 1971 - 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\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kutubuddin Ahammed And Ors. vs Kashim Ali And Anr. on 10 August, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971\" \/>\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=\"1971-08-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-01-22T05:39:16+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kutubuddin Ahammed And Ors. vs Kashim Ali And Anr. on 10 August, 1971\",\"datePublished\":\"1971-08-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-22T05:39:16+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971\"},\"wordCount\":1458,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Calcutta High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971\",\"name\":\"Kutubuddin Ahammed And Ors. vs Kashim Ali And Anr. on 10 August, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1971-08-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-22T05:39:16+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kutubuddin Ahammed And Ors. vs Kashim Ali And Anr. on 10 August, 1971\"}]},{\"@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":"Kutubuddin Ahammed And Ors. vs Kashim Ali And Anr. on 10 August, 1971 - 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\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kutubuddin Ahammed And Ors. vs Kashim Ali And Anr. on 10 August, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1971-08-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-01-22T05:39:16+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kutubuddin Ahammed And Ors. vs Kashim Ali And Anr. on 10 August, 1971","datePublished":"1971-08-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-22T05:39:16+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971"},"wordCount":1458,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Calcutta High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971","name":"Kutubuddin Ahammed And Ors. vs Kashim Ali And Anr. on 10 August, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1971-08-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-22T05:39:16+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kutubuddin-ahammed-and-ors-vs-kashim-ali-and-anr-on-10-august-1971#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kutubuddin Ahammed And Ors. vs Kashim Ali And Anr. on 10 August, 1971"}]},{"@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\/72315","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=72315"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72315\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=72315"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=72315"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=72315"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}