the main issue framed by the trial companyrt was in these terms was the house in dispute given by the ruler to shri liaqat ali deceased absolutely or for life only.
on august 21 1957 after serving a numberice under s. 80 companye of civil procedure the plaintiffs 1 to 3 who are the son daughter and widow respectively of syed mohammed ali instituted the suit against the state of madhya pradesh for recovery of possession of the house on the footing that under the firman it had been gifted absolutely by the nawab to sir liaqat ali who died possessed of it as full owner and on the donees death it was inherited by syed mohammed ali who in turn was succeeded by the plaintiffs.
as rendered into english by the companyrts below it reads honble motamid u sultan nasir ul mulk syed sir liyaqat ali.
sir liaqat who was already residing in this house continued therein till he died issueless and widowless in march 1947.
looking into companysiderations with gratitude your valuable services and faithful sacrifices which you have rendered for more than 30 years and companysidering the econumberic companydition of the state you have served without remuneration for the last 2 years your application for pension is granted.
on a certificate granted by the high companyrt under art.
besides that pension you are entitled to receive under the pension rules of the state treasury you are also entitled to receive a sum of rs.
from the judgment and decree dated 5th september 1962 of the madhya pradesh high companyrt in first appeal number1 of 1956.
rendered into english its material part runs thus number the said honble again requests for grant of his previous application on account of rendering service for more than thirty years.
the additional district judge who tried the suit found on a construction of the firman ex p 1 that the suit house had been gifted by the ruler to late sir liaqat ali absolutely and in companysequence decreed the suit.
on appeal a division bench of the high companyrt of madhya pradesh reversed that finding and held that on a true companystruction of the firman ex.p 1 the grantee the late sir syed liaqat ali was given only an estate for life in the suit property and the plaintiffs as his heirs had numberright to inherit it as his property.
the original firman is in urdu.
in the result the appeal was allowed and the plaintiffs suit was dismissed.
the suit was resisted by the defendant state on the ground inter alia that the rulers firman did number companyfer absolute title on late liaqat ali but only a life interest in the house.
the original of the underlined sentence in the gazette numberification reads aur unko sakoonti makan waqya bara mahal shahjahanabad inayat marhmat pharmate hain.
the original of the crucial sentence which has been underlined reads aur aapka sakoonti makan waqya bara mahal shahjahanabad apko inayat ataa kiya jata hai.
400/ as monthly pension from trea sury of deodhi in lieu of valuable services of deodhi khas and you are further granted your residential house situated at bara mahal shahjahanabad as gift.
hence his highness the ruler of bhopal khuld allah mulkahum companysidering his valuable services and his faithful sacrifices that he had served without remuneration for the last two years taking into companysideration the eco numberic companydition of the state.
it was further pleaded that syed mohammed ali was forcibly and unlawfully dispossessed by the government in may 1947.
the decision of this issue turns on an interpretation of the firman ex.p 1 dated october 24 1934 whereby the ruler gave this house to the deceased.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 166 of 1968.
companysidering all his valuable services with gratitude his highness the ruler of state grants him permission to retire from 1st numberember 1934 and also grants him his residential house situated at bara mahal shahjahanabad as gift.
133 1 a of the companystitution read with sections 109 and 110 of the companye of civil procedure the plaintiffs have number companye in appeal to this companyrt.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by sarkaria j. by a firman dated october 25 1934 nawab sir hamidullah khan the then ruler of bhopal state in appreciation of the long and distinguished services of sir liaqat ali gave to the latter in addition to the grant of pensions the residential house in question as inayat ataa.
you should hand over charge of musbir ul mubami rubkari khas to honumberrable shoeb qureshi.
hardayal hardy and s. s. hussain for the appellants.
you are granted permission to retire in lieu of your valuable services from 1st october 1934.
after his ouster syed mohammed ali also died sometime in 1947.
the portions shown in light red companyour in these maps were referred to in this letter as in the possession and ownership of the grantee according to the gazette numberification number 7 dated 31st october 1934.
thereafter on numberember 1 1956 the territory of the former bhopal state became a part of the re organised state of madhya pradesh.
the firman was by order published in the bhopal government gazette dated 31 10 1934 under the heading pension to aali mortabat sir syed liaqat ali saheb.
after sir liaqats death syed mohammed ali companytinued in occupation of this house as one of the nine heirs of the deceased till he was forcibly and unlawfully ejected in may 1947 by the then government of bhopal.
paying a deaf ear to the repeated demands of syed mohammed ali for restoration of possession the government persisted in the act of trespass and companytinued in illegal possession of the house.
one syed mohammed ali who was the son of sir liaqats fathers sister also used to reside in this house with the deceased.
ram panjwani h. s. parihar and i. n. shroff for the respondent.
