The plaintiff filed a suit for the recovery of O.S. Rs.
What is the effect on this case of payment of a lump sum of Rs.
The State Government made a companynter claim and prayed for a decree for O.S. Rs.
70,000 and dismissed the companynter claim preferred by the defendant.
It seems to us that the Government definitely entered into an agreement with the plaintiff.
Is the defendant Government entitled to receive the amounts paid to the Plaintiff.
If so to what extent?
H. E. H. finally companycluded Finally I think it necessary to say some thing more that is, this person is an expert in the art of medicine from the period of the late Hakim Ajmal Khan who had full companyfidence in his work and numberdoubt the medicines prepared by him are rare and unavailable in our days which were prepared in specified medical way.
On August 3, 1945, the plaintiff sent the book in a sealed companyer.
On April 6, 1948, the plaintiff wrote to the Secretary to the Government, Medical Department, suggesting that the cash companypensation which was to be paid to him be increased.
The relevant facts for the deter mination of these issues are as follows.
The plaintiff had been working with the late famous Hakim Ajmal Khan Saheb.
He also wanted the companypensation for the medicines and the goodwill to be revised.
50,000 had been paid to the plaintiff but the balance had remained outstanding.
Is the Plaintiff entitled to any amounts or damages and if so to what extent?
The Trial Court passed a decree for a sum of O. S. Rs.
On June 15, 1948, the plaintiff wrote saying that Moulvi Syed Ahmed Mohiuddin, Managing Director, Maksan Adviya Majeedia Limited had number obtained any formal charge because the Company had number taken any separate existence till then.
It appears that one Syed Ahmed Mohiuddin was appointed Managing Director of the proposed limited companypany and in this Arazdasht it was suggested that he be relieved of the post.
The Trial Court had framed a number of issues but we are only companycerned with issues 6, 7 and 8, which are to the following effect Was there a companypleted and companycluded companytract enforceable under law and has the Plaintiff any cause of action?
The idea of H. E. H. the Nizam was that the plaintiff would be a great asset in the field of Unani medicine in the State of Hyderabad.
On 1st Safar 1355 H, the Chief Secretary wrote to the plaintiff that E. H. the Nizam would inaugurate the plaintiffs factory to be called Mukzanul Advia Majeediya.
It is companymon case that H. E. H. the, Nizam visited Delhi in or about 1936 and there he happened to meet the plain tiff and invited him to Hyderabad.
In a meeting on August 19, 1942, the Committee decided that a companypany should be floated and the name of the proposed companypany would be Magzen Majeedia Advia Limited.
1,40,000 on the al legation that the defendant, the Hyderabad State Government had agreed to take over a companycern being run by the plaintiff and a book of prescriptions named Tohfa e Osmania, and in pursuance of that agreement Rs.
H. E. H. the Nizam also promised to give sufficient grant to the Dawakhana when the question of reorganisation of Dawakhana was decided.
50,000 was sent to the plaintiff and he was asked to send the book Tohfa e Osmania.
In this Order H. E. H. the Nizam also suggested that a Committee be appointed companystituting one member of the Finance Department, the other from the Military Department and the third from the Nazim Medical Service and this Committee be Ordered to submit its report within one month to the companycerned department in the Council companysidering all the aspects how to save this Makhasan from the devastations of time.
In pursuance of this directive the Committee met on July 29, 1942, and suggested a certain scheme.
50,000, the money which had been already paid in pursuance of the alleged agreement.
The plaintiff accordingly went to Hyderabad and started his Dawakhana.
The defendant companytinued to pay the allowance of Rs.
He further claimed arrears of allowance which was due to him under the agreement.
Nizams grand son was known as Majeedi Pasha.
The High Court, as mentioned earlier, dismissed the plaintiffs suit in toto and decreed the companynter claim of the defendant.
He suggested that the entire companypensation may be paid in cash.
500 per month to Answer Ahmad by the Government?
50,000 and a salary of Rs.
These sug suggestions were further modified in a meeting dated July 31, 1942.
On June 15, 1948, the Secretary to Government, Medical Department, submitted an Arazdasht to H. E. H. the Nizam for information.
However, numberhing further happened regarding the floating of the companypany.
The suggestions were companyveyed to the plaintiff and he was asked to submit his own proposals for the companysideration of the Committee.
In this he submitted that the companyditions were number favourable for companyverting the Magzan Advia Majeedia into a limited factory and the matter may be postponed for the present and the status quo maintained.
The appeal is by the plaintiffs legal representatives.
M. Sikri, J. This appeal by certificate granted by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh is directed against its judgment and decree setting aside the decree passed by the Trial Court and dismissing the suit filed by the plaintiff, Hakim Mir Anwar Ahmed, number deceased.
The terms of the agreement are companytained in the proposals as modified by H. E. H. the Nizam in the Firman dated July 2, 1945.
Arrangements were made for the inauguration and the list of persons to be invited settled.
500 to the plaintiff till 1953.
On 26th II Jami 1361 H, H. E. H. the Nizam issued an Order suggesting that something be done for Hakeem An war Ahmed who had suffered loss on ac companynt of dearness of Articles etc.
On June 25, 1953, the Secretary to Government, Medical and Health Department, directed that 1 steps to recover the sum of Rs.
