AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
4 paragraphs · 95 words
1.
A melkanom during the subsistence of a previous kanom is not void altogether, but is only voidable at the instance of the members of the tarwad
who were not parties to it. In this case it is found that the only remaining member of the tarwad has recognized the melkanom granted by his
predecessor. The defendant whose kanom has expired is not entitled to plead that he should hold on even after the expiry of his term,
2.
The decision of the lower Appellate Court is right. The second appeal is dismissed with costs.