A decree was passed by the Senior Civil Judge Lahore in favour of the Associated Hotel of India Limited against R.B. Jodha Mal for a sum of Rs.
MEMORANDUM A sum of Rs.
It is therefore requested that the amount of Rs.
In the High Court, stay of execution was sought and granted on companydition of deposit of Rs.
U. Reh.
From the Judgment order dated the 30th August, 1968 of the Delhi High Court Himachal Bench , Simla in Regular First Appeals No.
The crescendo of this unique series is the persuasive but opposing submissions we have listened to.
3,00,000 may please be deposited in the Treasury under the detailed head.
5,08,333 5 4.
K. Sen and M. C. Bhandare, for the appellant In CA No.
A decree in favour of the 1st plaintiff was made in the sum of Rs.
The uprooting and overturning of human masses led to evacuee legislation on both sides of the frontiers and the companymon case of the parties is that both of them are evacuees under the relevant Pakistani laws.
On alleged breach of companytract, Civil Suit No.
Since both the companytesting parties are evacuees the amount in question can number be paid until instructions from Government of Pakistan are received in the matter.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KRISHNA IYER, J. The principal appeal, C. A. 2303 of 1968, has arrived in this Court by certificates, under Art.
The deposit of Rs.
3,00,000 was deposited by R.B. Jodha Mal of Hoshiarpur, in the High Court Lahore for the benefit of the Associated Hotel of India Limited.
3,00,000/ in Court, in companynection with the decree, pending the High Court appeal.
3,00,000/ on July, 16 1949 and furnishing of security for the balance.
Two crucial factors gave a dramatic turn to the companyrse of the companyflict viz.,
Pursuant thereto, the sum was deposited by the judgment debtor into the executing Court, but the decree holder, on objection by the former, was number allowed to withdraw the money before disposal of the appeal.
GHULAM SHABBIR, Deputy Secretary Rehabilitation, for Rehabilitation Commissioner and Secretary to Government Punjab Rehabilitation Department.
A brief narration of those matters is number necessary to follow the development of the dispute before us.
P. Deposits and Advances Part 11 Deposits number bearing interest Departmental and Judicial Deposits Civil Deposits, Deposits on account of Evacuee Estates in the accounts of the Deputy Rehabilitation Commissioner Rent and Repairs , Lahore under intimation to this office.
Against this decree of the High Court the Associated Hotel of India Limited, filed an appeal in the Federal Court of Pakistan.
K. Sen, M. C. Bhandare and Rameshwar Nath, for respondents Nos.
3,00,000 was made in part payment of the above decree.
Thus the amount remained frozen.
All this took place in July, 1949.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
5,08,333 5 4 with future interest and companyts.
Under the head.
The Lahore High Court, on 24th November, 1949 dismissed the suit in toto, but, undaunted, Shri Oberoi moved the Federal Court of Pakistan which restored the decree of the trial Court on 21 12 53 in reversal of the High Courts decree.
5,00,0001 was advanced and the time fixed for companypletion of the sale was January 20, 1947.
The judgment debtor has accepted this position, and claims numberright or interest in the said amount.
2248 2303 of 1968.
This landmark event closes the chapter of substantive rights and here begins a set of encounters in realising the fruits of the decree.
evacuee legislation and the deposit of Rs.
2248/68 .
52,75,000/ to the 1st respondent Oberoi, who became a name in the hotel industry.
An appeal was successfully carried by the present appellant to the High Court of West Pakistan in Lahore since, by the time the trial Courts decree was made the Great Divide had happened with all the blood and tears of political history and traumatic effects on the law and life in both the companyntries.
Sale proceeds of Immovable Property and debts due to Evacuee etc.
2303/68 .
G/333, Dated Lahore 4th January, 1954.
R.B. Jodha Mal preferred an appeal in the High Court against the order of the Civil Judge.
P. Singh, for respondents Nos.
An earnest money of Rs.
Thus the final Court in Pakistan at the relevant time granted a decree in favour of the 1st respondent, against the appellant, and that stands.
This appeal was accepted on 24th November, 1949.
Even so, the sequence and significance of events leading up to the current companytroversy, sprawling across India and Pakistan and surviving for nearly three decades number, may be unfolded with advantage.
Now to the story.
This appeal was accepted by the Federal Court on 21st of December, 1953.
2248/68 .
T. Desai, A. Subba Rao, Naunmt Lal and Lalita Kohli, for the appellant In CA No.
2248/68 .
1, 2 4 9 In CA.
The legal saga formally began in undivided India when the 1st appellant, Kuthalia, the owner of Sedous Hotel, agreed to sell it on October 2, 1946 for a price of Rs.
21 of 1967 .
4, 6 11 In CA.
1 2 In CA No.
2303/68 T. Desai, A. Subba Rao, Naunit Lal and Lalita Kohli, for respondents Nos.
133 1 a of the Constitution, granted by the High Court of Delhi.
514/61 of 1946 was filed in the Court of the Senior Sub Judge, Lahore, by the 1st respondent Oberoi as the 1st plaintiff and the Associated Hotels of India Ltd., as the 2nd plaintiff, for recovery of the earnest money with interest.
Lahore was the venue of the earlier forensic episodes.
So far as the 2nd plaintiff was companycerned the reason for whose presence as party is obscure, if number oblique the suit was dismissed.
