The defendants further stated that the appellants were number citizens of India as they had voluntarily acquired Pakistani citizenship by obtaining passports from that companyntry .
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated January 23, 1960, of the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Indore in Second Appeal No.
It was also stated that the permits granted to them to remain in India were extended from time to time and ultimately up to about October, 1955, and thereafter they were served with orders to quit India.
They companytend that this order was illegal and without justification as they were number foreigners.
In the written statement filed by the defendants it was stated that the appellants had left India between March and May, 1948, and they returned for the first time on a temporary Pakistani passport sometime in the early part of 1955.
F. Bootwala, E. Udayarathanam and S. S. Shukla, for the appellants.
473 of 1959.
The Courts below held that a civil companyrts jurisdiction to entertain the suit was barred by s. 9 of the Citizenship Act, 1955.
C. Setalvad, Attorney General of India, B. Sen and T. Sen, for respondent No.
CIVIL, APPELLATE, JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.18 of 1961.
They said that the State of Madhya Pradesh served on them an order dated November 11, 1955, under s. 3 2 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, asking them to leave the companyntry.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SARKAR, J. This appeal raises the question whether the suit filed by the appellants was property dismissed on the ground that a civil companyrt had numberjurisdiction to entertain it.
L. Khaskalam and 1.
They also stated that they had made all efforts for the cancellation of the passports and to obtain permission to stay in India permanently but were unsuccessful.
They said that in the beginning of 1953 they went to Pakistan for a temporary visit without a passport but when they wanted to return they were companypelled to obtain Pakistani passports.
They further stated that, therefore, they companyld number be said to have acquired citizenship of Pakistan.
The appellants had filed the suit for a declaration that they were citizens of India and for an injunction restraining the defendants from removing them from India.
N. Shroff, for the respondents Nos.
The defendants were the Union of India, the State of Madhya Pradesh and the District Magistrate, Jhabua, in Madhya Pradesh.
They stated that they obtained these passports only as a device for securing their return to India and had really been companypelled to obtain the passports against their will.
April 5.
The appellants stated in the plaint that they were citizens of India and had number ceased to be such citizens.
