SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1955 Supreme(Bom) 41

M.C.CHAGLA, S.R.TANDOLKAR
Indrajitsinghji Vijaysinghji – Appellant
Versus
Rajendrasinghji Vijaysinghji – Respondent


Judgment

1. A very interesting question as to the rights of an ex-ruler arises in this appeal. The appellant is the third son of the late Maharaja of Rajpipla and the respondent is his eldest son. The appellant filed a petition for letters of administration to the state of the late Maharaja of Rajpipla with the will annexed. Citations were served amongst others upon the respondent.

The respondent filed a caveat and filed an affidavit in support of that caveat and under the rules of the High Court, to which we shall presently refer, the petition was converted into a suit and a summons in the suit was served upon the respondent, and when the suit came on for hearing before Desai J., the respondent raised a contention that the suit was not maintainable in the absence of a consent of the Central Government by reason of the provisions of Section 87-B of the Civil Procedure Code. The learned Judge upheld that contention and dismissed the suit and the petitioner has come in appeal.

2. Now, Section 86 gave certain immunity to Rulers of a Foreign State and that immunity was that he could not be sued in any Court otherwise competent to try the suit except with the consent of the Central Govern












































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top