In exercise of the powers companyferred on him by article XI of the Covenant the Rajpramukh on the.
Article XXI preserved the power of the Rulers to suspend, remit or companymute death sentences.
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment dated the 21st December, 1951, of the High Court of Judicature of Travancore Cochin arising out of the Judgment and Decree dated the 18th January, 1943, of the Court of District Judge, Kottayam.
C. Setalvad, Attorney General for India, C. K. Daphtary, Solicitor General for India, and K. P. Abraham T. Balakrishna Aiyar and M. R. Krishna Pillai, with them for respondent No.
P. Engineer P. N. Bhagwati, M. Abraham and M. S. K. Sastri, with him for the appellants.
1st July, 1949, promulgated Ordinance No.
May 21.
Broadly speaking, articles VI and XI vested the executive and legislative authority of the United State in the Rajpramukh subject to the companyditions and for the period therein specified.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DAS J. After stating the circumstances which gave rise to the present litigation, and the facts of the case, a brief summary of which is given above, His Lordship proceeded as follows .
193 of 1952.
In the meantime on the 29th May, 1949, came the Covenant of merger between the Rulers of Travancore and Cochin with the companycurrence and guarantee of the then Governor General of India for the formation as from the 1st July, 1949, of the United State of Travancore and Cochin with a companymon Executive, Legislature and Judiciary.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Article IV enjoined that there should be a Rajpramukh of the United State, the then Ruler of Travancore being the first Rajpramukh during his lifetime.
Article III provided that as from the appointed day i.e., 1st July, 1949 all rights, authority and jurisdiction belonging to the Ruler of either of the companyenanting States which appertained or were incidental to the Government of that State would vest in the United State.
