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

2006 Supreme(Cal) 378

High Court Of Calcutta
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, Pravendu Narayan Sinha
SYED FATEYAB ALI MEERZA - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
F. M. A. 2052 Of 2003
Decided On : 06/30/2006

The law of primogeniture, as applicable to the Murshidabad Estate, excludes the right of females and their successors to inherit the Nawab Estate.

Headnote:

MURSHIDABAD ESTATE - LOCUS STANDI - LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE - PRIMOGENITURE - [MURSHIDABAD ESTATE (MANAGEMENT OF PROPERTIES) AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS ACT, 1980 (WEST BENGAL ACT 55 OF 1980)] - The court held that the appellants, who were claiming to be the legal representatives of the original writ petitioner, could not be substituted in his place as they were not the lineal heirs male of the said Nawab Bahadur according to the custom of primogeniture, as required by the Indenture of 1891 and the Murshidabad Act of 1891. The court dismissed the appeals as abated and the connected applications as not maintainable or superfluous.

Fact of the Case:

The original writ petitioner, Syed Fateyab Ali Meerza, claimed to be the then Nawab Bahadur of Murshidabad and Amir-ul-omrah by virtue of succession from Syed Waris Ali Meerza, the last Nawab, who died in 1969. He challenged the Murshidabad Estate (Management of Properties) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1980 (West Bengal Act 55 of 1980) as ultra vires the Constitution of India. The writ petitioner died during the pendency of the appeals before the Supreme Court, and two applicants, Sajid Ali Meerza and Syed Mohammed Abbas Ali Meerza, claimed to be his legal representatives.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that neither of the applicants could be substituted as the legal representative of the original writ petitioner. Sajid Ali Meerza's heirs were not entitled to the right and privilege of the Nawab by virtue of the Indenture of 1891 as they were female heirs. Syed Mohammed Abbas Ali Meerza, who claimed through the predeceased sister of the last Nawab, could not inherit the Nawab Estate as the law of primogeniture excluded the right of females and their successors.

Issues: 1. Whether the appellants were the legal representatives of the original writ petitioner? 2. Whether the appellants could be substituted in the place of the original writ petitioner as his legal representatives?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the appellants were not the lineal heirs male of the said Nawab Bahadur according to the custom of primogeniture, as required by the Indenture of 1891 and the Murshidabad Act of 1891. 2. The court held that the appellants could not be substituted in the place of the original writ petitioner as his legal representatives as they were not entitled to the right and privilege of the Nawab by virtue of the Indenture of 1891 or the law of primogeniture.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeals as abated and the connected applications as not maintainable or superfluous.

BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA, J.

( 1 ) THESE two mandamus appeals have been assigned to this Bench by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice after the Supreme court has remanded the matters back to this Court in the light of the observations made in the order of that Court.

( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to these proceedings may be precised thus: (a) One Syed Fateyab Ali Meerza, (hereinafter referred as the writ petitioner), filed a writ application before this Court thereby praying for declaration that the provisions of the Murshidabad Estate (Management of Properties) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1980 (West Bengal Act 55 of 1980) are ultra vires the Constitution of India and void and for commanding the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to rescind, revoke, cancel and/or withdraw the said Act and to forbear them from giving effect thereto. The other consequential prayers including an order of injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with the affairs of the Murshidabad Estate or with the possession of the writ petitioner and his tenants in respect of Premises No. 85, park Street, Calcutta were also made therein. (b) In the said writ application, the writ petitioner claimed to be the then Nawab Bahadur of Murshidabad and Amir-ul-omrah by virtue of succession from Syed Waris Ali Meerza, the last Nawab, who died on November 20, 1969. According to the writ petitioner, his great grandfather, Faridoon Jah Syed Mansoor Ali Khan was the Nawab of Bengal. Bihar and Orrisa and was in law the independent Ruler of Suba Bengal and in view of differences which arose between the subsequent Nawab and the then Government of India, an Indenture dated 12th March, 1891 was made between Secretary of State for india of one part and Syed Hassan Ali Khan Bahadur, the then nawab, on the other part and by virtue of the said Sanad, an annual payment of Rs. 2,30,000/- from the revenue of the Government British india was settled to the Nawab Bahadur of Murshidabad as mentioned therein with certain other privileges. (c) Immediately after the execution of the said Indenture, the murshidabad Estate Act (Act 15 of 1891) was passed by the government of India to confirm and to give effect to the said Indenture dated 12th March, 1891 and the effect of the said Act read with the indenture was to guarantee the payment of annuity and/or pension of Rs. 2,30,000/- per annum or Rs. 19, 116 - 10 annas-8 paise per mensem and also to secure the vested right to the scheduled property to the nawab Bahadur for the time being. It was further provided that such estate would be descendible to the lineal heirs male of the said nawab Bahadur according to the custom of primogeniture, the eldest male of the eldest branch being preferred. (d) Subsequently, on 21st September, 1933, the Indian Legislature passed the Murshidabad Estate Administration Act, 1933, to provide inter alia, for the appointment of a Manager on behalf of the Secretary of the State of India in respect of the management of the properties of the Nawab Bahadur of Murshidabad and to afford protection against the liabilities to which he was exposed by reason of his debts and to prevent further debts and to repayment to his creditors and make provision for the payment to Nawab Bahadur for a sum sufficient for the maintenance of his position and dignity. (e) In terms of the provisions contained in the said Act, the then government of Bengal appointed Managers under the said Act who took possession of all the properties of the Nawab Bahadur of murshidabad for the management and since 1933, the successive managers appointed under the said Act managed the said estate which had an approximate income of several lakhs of rupees. (f) By virtue of the provision contained in the Government of India Act, 1935, the properties of the Murshidabad Estate vested in the then government of Bengal and under section 177 of the said Act, all contracts except those mentioned in section 178 thereof, made by the Secretary of the State were deemed to
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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 Back to top