The Court fixed March 23, 1957 for firing the objection.
debts obtained on lands would remain as before, and they would remain as securities till payment of the debts and the appellant would have numberright to transfer the land.
568 of 1963 against the order of the High Court passed in Appeal No.
During the second phase of this political absorption of the States, the Rulers of the Madhya Bharat States including the Ruler of Jaora State entered into a Covenant on April 22, 1948 for the formation of the United State of Gwalior, Indore and Malwa Madhya Bharat .
13 of 1959 from this order.
On April 30, 1957.
81 and 82 of 1957 and 13 of 1959 preferred by the appellant and allowed Appeal No.
On November 8, 1957.
568 and 767 of 1963 were heard together, and are being disposed of by this companymon judgment.
The case was fixed for hearing on June 19.
33 of 1958 before the High Court against order.
33 of 1958.
The Indian States parted with their sovereignty in successive stages, firstly on accession to the, Dominion of India, secondly on integration of the States into sizable administrative units and on closer accession to the Dominion of India, and finally on adoption of the Constitution of India and extinction of the separate existence of the States and Unions of States.
r. 6 b of the Code of Civil Procedure.
On that day, an application was filed on behalf of the appellant praying for setting aside the award.
Article VI provided that the Ruler of each Covenanting State shall number later than July 1, 1948 make over the administration of the State to the Rajpramukh and thereupon all rights, authority and jurisdiction belonging to the Ruler and appertaining or incidental to the Government of the State would vest in the United State of Madhya Bharat.
Notice of filing of the award under s. 14 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 was duly served on the parties.
The Covenant was signed by all the Rulers of the Covenanting States.
On March 9, 1957, an agent of the appellant filed a written submission accepting the award and requesting the Court to pass a decree in terms of the award.
13,000 each.
Article XI 4 provided that the amount would be free of alI taxes whether imposed by the Government of the United State or by the Government of India.
21,000 each and the next four instalments to be of Rs.
The award therefore provided The documents relating to debts obtained on lands and ornaments shall remain as before till the payment of the debts and they shall also remain as securities till then, and the Nawab Sahab shall have numberright to transfer the land.
He has also preferred Civil Appeal No.
5 of 1957.
Article XI 2 provided that the amount of the privy purse was intended to companyer all the expenses of the Ruler and his family including expenses of the residence, marriage and other ceremonies and neither be increased number reduced for any reason whatsoever.
the arbitrator filed the relevant papers.
33 of 1958 and 81 and 82 of 1957.
Appeals Nos.
1,75,000 was specified against the State of Jaora.
But on the same day, an application was made by another agent of the appellant intimating that steps would be taken for setting aside the award.
In the circumstances, on June 19.
100, and as it was number registered, numberdecree companyld be passed in terms of the award 2 the proceedings under s. 14 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 were incompetent in the absence of the companysent of the Central Government under s. 86 1 read with s. 87B, Code of Civil Procedure, and the decree passed in those proceedings is without jurisdiction and null and void and 3 the amount receivable by the appellant from the Central Government as his privy purse is a political pension within the meaning of s. 60 1 g , Code of Civil Procedure, and is number liable to attachment or sale in execution of the .decree.
Appeals from the judgment and order dated October 10, 1960.
The High Court dismissed Appeals Nos.
Civil Appeals Nos.
1957, the Court recorded the companypromise and passed a decree in terms of the award as modified by the companypromise.
and on September 9.
On the same day, the arbitrator filed the award in the Court of the District Judge, Ratlam.
767 of 1963 from the order of the High Court passed in Appeals Nos.
The time was subsequently extended up to April 2, 1957.
r. 46 of the Code of Civil Procedure in respect of sums payable to the appellant on account of the privy purse.
Article XIV guaranteed the succession, according to law and custom, to the gadding of each Covenanting State and to the personal rights, privileges, dignities and titles of the Ruler.
1957, the Central Government informed the appellant of the prohibitory order.
Delhi.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
In the meantime.
The appellant also filed Appeal No.
the respondent started Execution Case No.
But on April 5, 1957, an application was filed on behalf of the appellant withdrawing the objections and asking the Court to pass a decree in terms of the award, subject to the modification that the amount of the award would be payable in quarterly instalments of Rs.
By an agreement dated February 23, 1957.
81 of 1957 under s. 39 of the Indian Arbitration Act.
on the ground that the amount receivable by the appel lant on account of his privy purse was number attachable.
of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench, Indore, in Civil Miscellaneous Appeals Nos.
R.L. lyengar, S.K. Mehta and K.L. Mehta, for the respondent.
Article XI 1 provided that the Ruler of each Covenanting State shall be entitled to receive annually from the revenues of the United State for his privy purse the amount specified against that Covenanting State in Schedule I. In Sch.
II of the Covenant, the Covenanting States agreed to unite and integrate their territories into one State.
S. Pathak, B. Dutta, 1.
Some the items of the loans in respect of which the award was made were secured on lands and ornaments.
I, a sum of Rs.
Ratlam praying for vacating the order of transfer of the decree and for cancellation of the certificate issued under O. 21.
Article XI 3 provided that the Rajpramukh would cause the amount to be paid to the Ruler in four equal instalments at the beginning of each quarter in advance.
B. Dadachanji, O.C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, for the appellant.
On November 1.1957.
the appellant and the respondent agreed to refer their disputes regarding those dealings to the arbitration of Lala Durgashankar.
The appellant filed in the Madhya Pradesh High Court Appeal No.
1,60,000 was due to the respondent from the appellant, and .directed that this sum would be payable in eight quarterly installments, the first four installments to be of Rs.
1957 obtained an ex parte order for transfer of the decree to the Court of the District Judge.
By Art.
568 of 1963.
1908 cpnsenting to the execution of the decree against the properties of the appellant.
81 and 82 of 1957.
82 of 1957 under 0.43 1 m of the Code of Civil Procedure against the order dated June 19, 1957 recording the companypromise.
On the same date, the arbitrator made an award.
On that date.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Bachawat, J. The appellant is the Ruler of the former Indian State of Jaora.
the District Judge.
On behalf of the appellant, Mr. Pathak raised three companytentions only.
1940 against the order dated June 19.
He had money dealings with the respondent.
By this award, the arbitrator found that a sum of Rs.
On January 8, 1958, the appellant applied to the Court of the District Judge.
1957 treating it as an order refusing to set aside the award.
Delhi passed a prohibitory order under O. 21.
The respondent preferred Appeal No.
On the same day, an agent of the appellant filed an application praying for setting aside the companypromise and the award.
81 and 82 of 1957, 33 of 1958 and 13 of 1959 were heard and disposed of by the High Court by a companymon judgment on October 10, 1960.
19,000 each, the amount of interest would be payable in another quarterly instalment, the respondent would have a first charge on the sums receivable by the appellant from the Government of India as privy purse, and would be entitled to realise those sums under a letter of authority issued by the appellant, and if the Government would raise any objection to the payment, the respondent would have the right to realise the dues from the personal property of the appellant.
the Central Government gave a certificate under s 86 3 read with s. 8713 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The award was signed by the arbitrator and also by the appellant and the respondent.
568 and 757 of 1953.
the Court recalled the decree and cancelled the certificate as prayed for.
the Court received by registered post an application from the appellant withdrawing the objections and praying for an order in accordance with the companypromise application filed on April 5.
Article XIII of the Covenant secured to the Ruler of each Covenanting State all personal privileges, dignities and titles then enjoyed by them.
By order dated March 15, 1958.
By letter dated December 26.
By another order dated January 7, 1959, the District Judge, Ratlam dismissed certain objections of the appellant filed in Execution Case No.
This application was signed by the respondent in token of his companysent to the modification of the amount of the instalments.
33 of 1958 preferred by the respondent.
The appellant has referred to this Court Civil Appeal No.
2 of 1958.
