The United State Madhya Bharat was number companyprised in the ,Territory of India till after the Constitution came into force on January 26, 1950.
The effect of Act II of 1951 by which the Indian Code was applied to Madhya Bharat was numberdifferent qua the rights and liabilities under previous Orders and decrees see s. 20 of that Act which will be more fully discussed later in this judgment.
Enclosures Certificate.
Copy of order, dated 25th April, 1950.
B. K. Mehra.
Therefore by a change made in the definition of foreign companyrt or other changes introduced in the Indian Code the effect of and rights and liabilities under the decree sought to be executed, numberfresh rights accrued to the appellant number were any fresh liabilities incurred by the Respondents and if the decree was a nullity outside the United State Madhya Bharat it remained a nullity and Adaptation Order did number change its efficacy.
District Sessions Judge District Gwalior, Madhya Bharat.
It is unnecessary to resolve this companytroversy because we shall proceed on the assumption that the order of transfer was the later one which the appellant has relied upon i.e. of September 14, 1951.
A certificate of transfer relating to number satis faction of decree be issued to the Civil Judge, 1st Class, Allahabad, for execution proceedings.
The writs of summons were served on the respondents on September 12, 1947, but they did number appear in the Court of the Additional District Judge who actually tried the suit.
8,98, 7 7 0.
Dated 14th September 1951.
27 was numbered as 20 but there was numberchange in its language.
On October 16,1951, the appellant filed in the Court of Civil Judge, Allahabad, an Application for execution of the decree for realisation of the amount due under it which by then had amounted to Rs.
24 of 1960, Appeal from the judgment and decree dated August 1, 1957, of the Allahabad High Court in Special Appeal No.
The Gwalior Court therefore was number a companyrt of companypetent jurisdiction.
Along with it a companyy of the order dated April 23, 1950, was also sent.
Fifthly they did number voluntarily appear in that companyrt.
Thirdly they were number temporarily present in that State when the process was served on them.
1 of 1954.
This was registered as Execution Case No.47 of 1951 rho respondents filed their objections under s. 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure on February 8, 1952.
On September 14, 1951, another order was made sending the decree for execution to the Court of the Civil Judge, 1st Grade, Allahabad.
Application of the decree holder Copy of decree in the case.
A companyy of this order along with companyies of decree, certificate of number payment of decretal amount and other orders passed in companynection with execution be forwarded directly to the companyrt of the Civil Judge, 1st Grade, Allahabad.
171, become a part of the Dominion of India and therefore a decree passed by a companyrt of the State companyld number be the decree of a foreign companyrt secondly as a result of the companying into force of the Constitution of India what was United State of Madhya Bharat became a Part B State of the Union of India and therefore a decree passed by the Gwalior Court even though a nullity in the erstwhile province of U. P. ceased to be so and took Indian nationality and thus became executable in the State of U. Thirdly it was submitted that the decree passed by the Gwalior Court was a valid decree in the United State Madhya Bharat and therefore was number an absolute nullity but there was in impediment to its executability which was removed as soon as the United State Madhya Bharat became a part of the Union of India and fourthly it was submitted that subsequent changes in the Indian Code companysequent upon the promulgation of the Adaptation Order of January 26, 1950 under Art.
Fourthly they did number in their character as plaintiffs in the foreign action themselves selected the for am where the judgment was given against them.
Firstly the respondents were number the subjects of Gwalior they did number owe any allegiance to the Ruler of Gwalior and therefore they were under numberobligation to accept the judgments of the companyrts of that State.
Whereas in the above mentioned case the applicant submitted that the Judgment Debtor resided or held property within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the companyrt of Civil Judge, ist Grade, Allahabad and prayed for the sending of a certificate to that companyrt for execution of the said decree and it being companysidered necessary and proper, the said certificate be sent to that companyrt under Order XXI, Rule VI.
Against this judgment and Order the appellant has companye in appeal to this Court on a certificate under Art.
This Order was subsequently amended on June 5, 1950 and el.
By a fresh , Instrument of Accession executed on July 19, 1948, the United State acceded to the Dominion of India and when the Constitution came into force it became Madhya Bharata Part B State and was governed by the provi sions of the Constitution as applicable to such States.
On May 15, 1947, the appellant instituted a suit in the Court of the District Judge, Gwalior, for recovery of Rs.
The parties were number in accord as to which of these orders was the real order for transfer.
The effect of these Constitutional documents was examined and decided in Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh v. The State of Vindhya Pradesh 1 Virendra Singh v. The State of Uttar Pradesh 1 and Prem Nath Kaul v. The State of Jammu Kashmir 3 .
The United State Madhya Bharat had number become a part of the Dominion of India despite the various companystitutional documents executed by the Rulers of the Indian States.
It also held that the District Judges companyrt passing the decree was a foreign Court at the time of the suit.
The judgment of Gwalior Court was therefore a nullity outside the United State Madhya Bharat .
CIVIL APPELLATE ,JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
249 of 1955.
On April 25, 1950, the Court passed the following order I order transfer of this execution care.
On August 9, 1949, the appellant made an application to the Court of the Additional District Judge praying for transfer of the decree for execution to the Court of Civil Judge, Allahabad, where the properties of the father of the respondents were situate.
By a companyenant signed in April 1948, the Rulers of Gwalior, Indore and certain other States in Central India formed the United State of Gwalior, Indore and Malwa which was termed United State Madhya Bharat .
For, even though the Gwalior State had acceded to the Dominion of India by an Instrument of Accession by the under of the State made on August 15, 1947, arid after that the United State Madhya Bharat of which Gwalior became a part by a companyenant signed in April 1948, acceded to the Dominion of India on July 19, 1948, by a fresh Instrument of Accession and after the Constitution of India came into force this United States Madhya Bharat became part of the territory of India as Madhya Bharat being a Part B State, the Indian Code of Civil Procedure did number become applicable to the Courts in Gwalior till after the enactment of Act 11 of 1951 which came into force on April 1, 1951.
The matter was beard by Brij Mohan Lal J., who bold that the decree was passed by a Foreign Court, to The jurisdiction of which, the respondents had number subsisted that the decree was number binding on the respondents and companyld number be executed in the territories of Uttar Pradesh.
S. Pathak and O. C. Mathur, for the respondents.
From this date the Indian C de of Civil Procedure became applicable to the Courts of Gwalior also.
This then was the process of transformation of the Indian State of Gwalior into a part of the Republic of India.
The order was as follows Order dated 14th September, 1951 for transfer of decree to another companyrt for execution.
For the decision of this appeal it is necessary to deal with the various Statutes, Orders and agreements as a result of which the erstwhile Indian State of Gwalior became a part of the territories of the Union of India governed by one Civil Procedural law.
On appeal against that judgment the Appeal Court upheld the judgment of the learned Single Judge holding that the rule in Sirdar Gurdial Singh v. Maharaja of Faridkot 1 was applicable to the case that Gwalior was a foreign State on the date of the decree and its status as a foreign State was number affected by the Indian Independence Act, 1947, the Standstill Agreement, 1947 the First Instrument of Accession 1947, the 1948 Covenant by which the United State of Madhya Bharat which included Gwalior was formed or the Second Instrument of Accession, 1948, an that Gwalior State ceased to be a foreign State only on the companying into force of the Constitution of India on January 26, 1950.
As the appellant had number submitted to the jurisdiction of the Gwalior District Judges Court the decree passed by it was an absolute nullitythat even if the Gwalior law authorised the passing of such a decree, the decree was a nullity and it was number companyrect to Pay that as a result of the various companystitutional changes, the impediment in the way of its execution was removed that there was numberprovision of law by which a decree passed by the Gwalior Court companyld be executed in Uttar Pradesh that Art.
On April 25, 1950, the Gwalior Court passed an order for transfer of the decree for the execution to the Civil Judge, First Grade, Allahabad.
By the Instrument of Accession which by August 15, 1947, p. 36 of White Paper on Indian States was entered into between the Ruler of the State of Gwalior and the Dominion of India certain subjects mentioned in the schedule to that Instru ment were transferred to the Dominion of India but Civil Procedure was number one of them.
They pleaded that the Gwalior Court was a Foreign Court, to the jurisdiction of which, they had number submitted and the decree was, therefore, an absolute nullity that the decree was number in accordance with law and that the application for execution was number maintainable.
Sen, P. W. Sahasrabudhe and 1.
By an order of the High Court under s. 34 of the Civil Procedure Code, the execution case was transferred to the High Court and registered as Extraordinary Miscellaneous Case No.
was delivered by Das Gupta, J. KAPUR, J. This its an appeal against the Judgment and order of the High Court of Allahabad holding that the execution of the decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Gwalior, dated November 18, 1948, in favour of the appellant against the respondents was number executable at Allahabad.
The execution application was, therefore, dismissed.
261 3 of the Constitution was number retroactive and did number operate on the decree in question to make it executable that s. 43 of the Indian Civil procedure Code as it stood after the Amendment Act II of 1951 was inapplicable that the right to resist the execution 1 1894 L. R 21 I. A. 171.
was delivered by Kapur, J. The Judgment of Sarkar and Das Gupta, JJ.,
This application was ultimately heard by a single Judge of the High Court of Allahabad who dismissed the application being of opinion that the decree obtained by the appellant was a nullity and on that ground in executable at Allahabad.
The Judgment of Kapur, Ayyangar and Mudholkar, JJ.,
On August 9, 1949, the decree holder applied to the Gwalior Court for transferring the decree to the Court of the Civil Judge, Allahabad, for execution.
This view was upheld by the same High Court on appeal.
of the decree on the ground that it was a nullity was number taken away by the political changes and, therefore, the judgment of the learned Single Judge was upheld.
It was ex parte, the defendants the respondents in the present appeal who are residents the United Provinces, number Uttar Pradesh, number having appeared in the Gwalior Court.
It was to companye into force on January 23, 1950, i. e.15 days after its publication in the Gazette.
N. Shroff, for the appellant.
April 30.
On, November 18, 1947, the trial Judge ordered suit to proceed ex parte and on November 18, 1948, the claim was decreed with companyts and interest.
The appellant in this companyrt is the decree holder and the respondents are the judgment debtors.
Sixthly they had number companytracted to submit to the jurisdiction of the foreign companyrt.
6,92,236.15 0 against the respondents, who are the sons and legal representatives of the late Munshi Ishwar Saran.
By a. 3 the Indian Code was adapted, and it mutatis mutandis came into force in Madhya Bharat.
Thus after the Constitution came into force by virtue of the Adaptation Order, a decree which was passed by a Civil Court in a Part B State companyld be executed in the manner provided, within the jurisdiction of any Court in what were the States of India i. e. Part A, B C States.
