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

1994 Supreme(Raj) 500

High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : P.P.NAOLEKAR
IBRAHIM, APPELLANT - Appellant
Versus
GULAM MOHAMMAD - Respondent
C. S. A. 1 Of 1978
Decided On : 11/16/1994

Advocates Appeared:
A.K.Acharya, R.K.Thanvi

An alien enemy cannot institute or continue a suit in court without the permission of the Central Government.

Headnote:

ENEMY PROPERTY ACT, 1968 - SECTION 2(C), 8, 18 - CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 - SECTION 83 - VESTING OF ENEMY PROPERTY IN CUSTODIAN - SUIT BY ALIEN ENEMY FOR EJECTMENT - MAINTAINABILITY.

Fact of the Case:

Plaintiff, a citizen of Pakistan, filed a suit for ejectment on the ground of arrears of rent. The defendant raised an objection that the suit was not maintainable as the plaintiff was an alien enemy and had not obtained the consent of the Central Government under Section 83 of the Civil Procedure Code.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the suit was not maintainable as the plaintiff was an alien enemy and had not obtained the consent of the Central Government under Section 83 of the Civil Procedure Code. The court also held that the property in suit had vested in the Custodian of Enemy Property under the Enemy Property Act, 1968, and the plaintiff had no right to institute or continue with the suit.

Issues: 1. Whether the suit filed by the plaintiff was not maintainable on the ground that the plaintiff was declared as alien enemy during the pendency of the suit? 2. Whether the prosecution of the suit by the plaintiff was barred under the provisions of the Enemy Property Act, 1968 after the declaration of Emergency by the Government of India during the pendency of the suit ?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. Section 83 of the Civil Procedure Code prohibits an alien enemy from instituting a suit in court without the permission of the Central Government. 2. The property in suit had vested in the Custodian of Enemy Property under the Enemy Property Act, 1968, and the plaintiff had no right to institute or continue with the suit.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed.

Judgment


P. P. NAOLEKAR, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant filed a suit for ejectment on the ground of arrears of rent. Admittedly, the appellant is a citizen of Pakistan. The respondent filed a written statement and raised an objection that by virtue of Section 83 of the Civil Procedure Code, the suit, as it is filed by the plaintiff alien enemy without the consent of the Central Government, is not maintainable. Both the courts below have upheld the objection raised by the respondent and dismissed the suit. The present appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:" (I) Whether the suit filed by the plaintiff was not maintainable on the ground that the plaintiff was declared as alien enemy during the pendency of the suit? (ii) Whether the prosecution of the suit by the plaintiff was barred under the provisions of the Enemy Property Act, 1968 after the declaration of Emergency by the Government of India during the pendency of the suit ?"

( 2 ) UNDER Section 83 of the Civil Procedure Code, an alien enemy residing in India with the permission of the Central Government can file a suit in any court, competent to try the same, as if they are citizens of India. The alien enemy, who is residing in India without the permission of the Central Government has been prohibited from instituting suit in the court.

( 3 ) AN order has been passed exercising the powers under R. 133 (V) (1) of the Defence of India Rules, 1962 by the Central Government on 10-9-1965 which is as under: -"in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 133v of the Defence of India Rules, 1962, the Central Government hereby orders that all immovable property in India, belonging to or held by or managed on behalf of all Pakistan nationals, shall vest in the custodian of Enemy Property for India with immediate effect. 2. Nothing in this notification shall apply to any such property, belonging to or held by or managed on behalf of such of the Pakistan nationals as are employed in the different Missions of the Government of Pakistan in India. Under Rule 151 (1) of the Defence and Internal Security of India Rules, 1971 the Central Government issued a notification No. 5511, which was published in the Central Gazette, Extra Ordinary Part II Section 3 (2), page 3406 dated 18-12-1971, which reads as under: - "in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 151 of the Defence of India Rules, 1971, the Central Govt. hereby direct that all Enemy Property as defined in clause (4) of Rule 138 of the said Rules, whether movable and immovables and belonging to or held by or managed on behalf of: (i) an enemy as defined in clause (2) (c) of Rule 130 of the said Rules, or (ii) an enemy subject as defined in clause (5) of Rule 138 of the said Rules, shall vest in Custodian of Enemy Property for India. "by virtue of the order issued on 10-9-1965 all the immovable properties in India belonging to or held or managed on behalf of all Pakistan Nationals vested in Custodian of an enemy property with immediate effect. Thus, after the issuance of the order, the property belonging to the plaintiff-appellant vested in the Custodian of the Enemy Property. The enemy property is defined in Section 2 (c) of the Enemy Properties Act, 1968, to be any property for the time being belonging to or held or managed on behalf of an enemy, an enemy subject or an enemy firm. Section 8 provides for the powers of the Custodian in respect of enemy property vested in it. Section 8 (1) (ii) gives him power to take action for recovery of any money due to the enemy and clause (iv) authorises him to institute, defend or continue any suit or other legal proceedings, refer to any dispute for arbitration and compromise any debt claims or liability. Thus, the Custodian is a person, who is authorised to take any action for recovery of any money due to the enemy and also to institute, defend or continue any suit or legal proceedings. As soon as the property is vested with the Custodian, all



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