1996 Supreme(All) 829

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
A. B. SRIVASTAVA
TALAT FATIMA HASAN - Appellant
Versus
HIS HIGHNESS NAWAB SYED MURTAZA ALI KHAN SAHIB BAHADUR - Respondents
Original Suit 4 Of 1972
Decided On : 07/31/1996

Headnote:

The court held that the succession to the private properties of the late Nawab Raza Ali Khan, the ruler of Rampur State, was governed by the rule of male lineal primogeniture and the principle of impartibility, and not by the Muslim Personal Law. The court found that the instrument of merger between the Rampur State and the Dominion of India did not alter this position, and that the late Nawab's eldest son, Nawab Murtuza Ali Khan, succeeded to the Gaddi of Rampur and the properties in question upon his father's death. The court also held that the plaintiff, Talat Fatima Hasan, did not have any right to inherit any share in the properties in suit, as she was not one of the heirs under the rule of male lineal primogeniture.

Fact of the Case:

The plaintiff, Talat Fatima Hasan, filed a suit for partition of movable and immovable properties left by her late father, Nawab Raza Ali Khan, the ruler of Rampur State. The plaintiff claimed that she was entitled to a share in the properties as one of the heirs of her father, according to the Muslim Personal Law. The defendant, Nawab Murtuza Ali Khan, the eldest son of the late Nawab, contested the suit, claiming that he was the sole heir to the properties under the rule of male lineal primogeniture, which was the rule of succession applicable to the Gaddi of Rampur State. The defendant also claimed that the properties in question were impartible, and thus not subject to partition.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the rule of succession to the Gaddi of Rampur State had always been the rule of male lineal primogeniture, and that this rule also applied to the private properties of the ruler. The court held that the instrument of merger between the Rampur State and the Dominion of India did not alter this position, and that the late Nawab's eldest son, Nawab Murtuza Ali Khan, succeeded to the Gaddi of Rampur and the properties in question upon his father's death. The court also held that the plaintiff, Talat Fatima Hasan, did not have any right to inherit any share in the properties in suit, as she was not one of the heirs under the rule of male lineal primogeniture.

Issues: 1. Whether the suit has not been properly valued and whether the Court fee paid is insufficient as alleged in para 59 of the Written Statement of Defendant No. 1? 2. Whether the succession of the property in suit left on his death by late Nawab Raza Ali Khan after the merger of former State of Rampur with the dominion of India, was governed by personal law applicable to shia muslims to the exclusion of any custom including that of primogeniture? 3. What is the effect of mutation in favour of the defendant No. 1 in respect of the private properties in suit left by late Nawab Raza Ali Khan? 3a. Whether the non-filing of objection to the mutation proceedings by the plaintiff was on account of the fact that she had no knowledge of the said proceedings? 4. Is the present suit for partition barred by limitation as far as it relates to the movable properties left by late Nawab Raza Ali Khan? 5. Is the suit not maintainable due to the creation of the Raza trust and other grants and gifts made by the late Nawab Syed Raza Ali Khan in favour of his children as enumerated in subparas (iii) and (iv) of para. 3 of the written statement of defendant No. 1/2 and the acceptance of the same by the plaintiff and defendant Nos. 2 to 15? 6. Are the properties in suit left by late Nawab Syed Raza Ali Khan impartible, as alleged in para 3 of written statement of defendant No. 1/2? 7. Whether the suit is bad for partial partition for the reasons mentioned in paras 11 and 13 of the written statement? 8. Is the present suit for partition not maintainable due to the pendency of another suit for partition of the properties left by late Nawab Syed Raza Ali Khan, namely civil Suit No. 219 of 1972 Syed Sirajul Hasan v. Syed Murtaza Ali Khan and others pending on the original side of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi as stated in para. 14 of the written statement of defendant No. 1/27. 9. Whether the suit for partition of Khas Bagh palace and Shahbad castle, which are subject matter of suit is not maintainable, as alleged in para. No. 49 of the written statement of defendant No. 1? 10. Whether the written statement of defendant No. 1/2 it not properly verified? If so, its effect? 11. Whether the Nawab Raza Ali Khan left any list of movable properties which has been given in the schedule attached with the plaint? 12. To what relief if any, is the plaintiff entitled? 13. Whether the defendant No. 1/2 and 1/3 are liable to render account of the income profits,8 usufruct and benefits arising out of the properties in suit? 14. Whether the plaintiff was born on 29/02/1952 as alleged in paragraph No. 22 of the plaint. If so, its effect? 15. Whether the share, if any of the defendant No. 13 in the property in question stands vested in the custodian of enemy property of India, Bombay. If so, its effect?

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the rule of succession to the Gaddi of Rampur State had always been the rule of male lineal primogeniture, and that this rule also applied to the private properties of the ruler. The court held that the instrument of merger between the Rampur State and the Dominion of India did not alter this position, and that the late Nawab's eldest son, Nawab Murtuza Ali Khan, succeeded to the Gaddi of Rampur and the properties in question upon his father's death. The court also held that the plaintiff, Talat Fatima Hasan, did not have any right to inherit any share in the properties in suit, as she was not one of the heirs under the rule of male lineal primogeniture.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit with costs to the contesting defendant.