50000 was mentioned as the value of the madras properties and rs.
accordingly he set aside the order of the assistant custodian which companyfirmed the transfer of properties companyered by these two deeds.
the only additional ground urged by mr.
he went further and held that there was numberjustification for the assistant custodian taking a different view as regards the other properties.
cause was shown by fazal bhai dhala and thereafter after hearing arguments on his behalf by his advocate mr.
it appears that the custodian general also made a suggestion to the custodian madras that he might examine the propriety of the order passed by the assistant custodian.
the sum of rs.
achhru ram and t. r. v. sastri for the appellants.
fazal bhais application to the custodian general of evacuee property india for revision of the custodians order was heard by the deputy custodian general of evacuee property india and was rejected.
appeals by special leave from the judgment and orders dated december 26 1953 and april 30 1957 of the custodian general and deputy custodian general of evacuee property in revision number.
35000 as the value of the orissa properties.
the custodian agreed with the assistant custodian in respect of these properties and held that these had been rightly declared as evacuee properties.
rathanams order was allowed to go unchallenged by the department and as it is number before me therefore i am number called upon to express my opinion.
194 of 1956 and 353 of 1958.
he held that the transfer was bona fide and made an order in these terms i therefore accept the dissolution of the firm of fazalbhai dhala and companypany companyered by the dissolution deed dated 12 8 49 and companyfirm the transfer of the immoveable properties covered by the deed dated 10 8 49 under section 40 5 of the administration of evacuee property act 1950.
5055r judl 1953 and.
fazal bhai moved the custodian general of india for revision of this order of the custodian orissa.
1161/r judl/1954 respectively.
the custodian general however refused to interfere.
he directed the assistant custodian madras to take steps under the evacuee property act in respect of these evacuee properties consequent on the cancellation of the companyfirmation of transfer.
the custodian finally ordered in consequence of my above decision according to s. 6 of the evacuee interest separation act the entire properties in schedules a and b should number be treated as evacuee pro perties and revised action should be taken to numberify as such under s. 7 3 of the administration of evacuee property act and the appellant be directed to get his 8 annas share in the properties separated in the companyrt of the competent officer.
the custodian in his order dated july 5 1954 has held that the transaction companyered by the deed of dissolution also was number bona fide.
civil appeals number.
85000 of which rs.
a deed of partnership was executed on january 1 1941 and the firm was registered in the register of firms cuttack under s. 59 of the indian partnership act.
it is proper to mention at the outset that it is numberlonger disputed that abdulla bhai is an evacuee though the exact date from which he became such an evacuee does number clearly appear from the record and that all the immovable properties which are the subject matter of the appeal were the assets of the firm fazalbhai dhala company four companytentions were urged in support of the appeal.
this was on december 26 1953.
civil appellate jurisdiction.
when this matter came to the numberice of the custodian general of evacuee property in the companyrse of the proceedings before him in respect of the orissa property he observed as for the madras properties i numberice that mr.
the companysideration in the document was mentioned as rs.
his conclusion was that in fact with regard to these properties also the same amount of mala fides was present and as such these should also be included in the list of evacuee properties and that it is but proper that the entire 8 annas share of the properties mentioned in schedules a and b of the evacuee abdulla should be treated as evacuee properties.
march 21.
on august 10 1949 abdulla bhai dhala executed a deed of sale in respect of some immovable properties at jharsuguda in orissa and also certain properties at madras in favour of fazal bhai dhala.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by das gupta j. of these two appeals one civil appeal number 194 of 1956 is against the order of the custodian general of india declining to interfere with the order of the custodian of evacuee property orissa in respect of certain properties claimed by the appellant as his and the other appeal civil appeal number 353 of 1958 is against the order of the deputy custodian general of india declining to interfere with the order of the custodian of evacuee property madras in respect of properties situate in madras claimed by the same appellant as belonging to him.
s. bindra and d. gupta for respondents.
the appellant fazal bhai dbala and his brother abdulla dhala were partners in a business of hides and skins.
