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 His ruling powers were withdrawn by the British government in the year 1923. Thereafter, he was deposed from the Gaddi in 1928 and was exiled to Kodaikanal in Tamil Nadu. He resided in Kodaikanal till 1942 when he died. He left behind his wife, Sarojini Devi, three sons, Pratap Singh, Kharagh Singh and Gurbaksh Singh and two daughters, Kamla Devi and Vimla Devi

(6) SAROJINI Devi, wife of Ripudaman Singh and her children were residing in England from 1934 to 1944. She returned to India when her eldest son, Pratap Singh was to receive administrative training as he was to become the Ruler of Nabha State by the applicability of rule of primogeniture. It also requires to be stated that the entire family came back to India in the year 1945. Gurbaksh Singh, the third son of Ripudaman Singh died in November 1963. He left behind his widow, Chandra Prabha Kurnari and two minor daughters, Krishna Kumari and Tuhina Kumari and a minor son Vivek Singh.

(7) THE property known as Sterling Castle situate in Simla was owned by Col. S. Appaji Rao Sitole of Gwalior. In view of the restriction relating to acquisition of property imposed by the British government Ripudaman Singh purchased this property in the name of his friend Dr Tehl Singh. The sale deed was dated 21/12/1921. Dr Tehl Singh executed the deed of relinquishment on 30/04/1952. By the said deed, Dr Tehl Singh relinquished his title and conferred it upon the three sons and the widow of late Ripudaman Singh. It is this property which forms the subject-matter of the suit

(8) IN 1957, dispute arose between the parties. Pratap Singh claimed absolute right over this property denying the title of the other heirs of Ripudaman Singh. When the Municipal Committee, Simla refused to effect mutation in their names in view of the objection raised by Pratap Singh, notice was issued to the Municipal Committee and the Sub-Registrar, Simla that the refusal to do so was not proper. Similarly, notice was issued to Pratap Singh. On 31/03/1961, the two younger brothers sought leave from the central government under Section 86 read with Section 87-B of the Code of.Civil Procedure to file a suit against Pratap Singh. That was refused in-July 1961. On 30/01/1962, Pratap Singh sold this property in favour of The Save the Children Fund, a society incorporated in the United Kingdom for a sum of Rs. 50,000.00.

(9) SAROJINI Devi, Kharagh Singh and the minor children of Gurbaksh Singh filed a suit for partition and in the alternative for joint possession and also for the recovery of mesne profits. It was averred in the plaint that the plaintiffs had a share in the Sterling Castle as the heirs of late Ripudaman Singh. Though the property ostensibly stood in the name of Dr Tehl Singh it was Ripudaman Singh who was the real owner, the sale consideration having b