Judgment

MOHAN, J

(1) THE facts leading to these appeals are as under.

(2) NABHA was a Princely State in pre-independence India. It was one of the three Phulkian States. The other two were Patiala and Jind.

(3) IN the matter of succession to Chiefship, the rule of primogeniture was followed by the Phulkian families. This rule was also followed in the State of Nabha. While the eldest son became the Chief, provision was made for the younger sons for their maintenance by way of grant of jagir, land or purse,

(4) WHEN the British had paramountcy in India they subjected the ruling chiefs to various restrictions. One such restriction was about the purchase of the property outside the territory of their own State. The policy was enunciated to discourage the acquisition, whether direct or indirect, by Sovereign or Feudatory princes, of any lands in British Territory, however and from whomever acquired. This policy was communicated to all native States in Punjab including the State of Nabha.

(5) MAHARAJA Ripudaman Singh was the Ruling Chief of Nabha State in the early twenties of this century. His ruling powers were withdrawn by the British g