https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192522 The court determined that the transaction between parties was a completed sale, not an agreement to sell. It found the transaction was not champertous and binding, as it was not opposed to public policy. Ratan Chand was deemed to have fulfilled his contractual obligations, entitled to a half share in the property. The court set aside the lower court's decree, restoring the trial court's decision recognizing the plaintiff's entitlement to a half share in the property. The appellant was awarded appeal costs from the respondent who contested the appeal. en-us Wed, 27 Jan 1954 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Jun 2017 16:50:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192522 The court determined that the transaction between parties was a completed sale, not an agreement to sell. It found the transaction was not champertous and binding, as it was not opposed to public policy. Ratan Chand was deemed to have fulfilled his contractual obligations, entitled to a half share in the property. The court set aside the lower court's decree, restoring the trial court's decision recognizing the plaintiff's entitlement to a half share in the property. The appellant was awarded appeal costs from the respondent who contested the appeal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 27 Jan 1954 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192522