RATTAN CHAND HIRA CHAND Vs. ASKAR NAWAZ JUNG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Although the leave granted by this Court is limited to the question whether the plaintiff is entitled to an amount of Rs. 75,000/- which according to him he had actually advanced and the respondents had received for the purpose of prosecuting their litigation and, therefore, the issue to be answered lies within a narrow compass, it is necessary to state the relevant facts briefly to understand correctly the significance of the question to be answered.

(2.) Nawab Salar Jung III, a celebrity of the erstwhile State of Hyderabad expired on March 2, 1949 leaving behind him no issue but a vast estate. As was expected, several persons came forward claiming to be his heirs, and among them were Sajjid Yar Jung and Turab Yar Jung who claimed to be his first cousins. The Nizam by a notification of May 9, 1949, appointed a Committee to administer the estate of the late Nawab Salar Jung. On the merger of the Hyderabad State, the Central Government by the Nawab Salar Jung Bahadur (Administration of Assets) Act, 1950, continued the Committee and also provided that no suit or other legal proceeding for the enforcement of any right or remedy in respect of any asset, shall be instituted in any Court by any person other than the Committee except with the previous consent of the Central Government.

(3.) In the meanwhile, on May 31, 1949, the Nizam had already appointed a Commission to enquire into the question of succession to the estate, and one of the questions referred to the Commission was whether the Jagir of the late Nawab Salar Jung escheated to the Government and another was the ascertainment of his heirs. The Commission was unable to proceed with the inquiry as some of the claimants filed a writ petition in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh challenging the jurisdiction of the Commission to enquire into the question of succession. The High Court, by its decision of September 23, 1952 held that the commission was not the proper forum for determining the question of succession and directed that the management of the estate should remain with the Committee until the question was settled by a civil Court. The question was ultimately settled by compromise between the various claimants including the Government. The compromise was incorporated in a decree dated March 5, 1959 passed in a suit being Suit No. O.S. 13/58 which was filed by some of the claimants. The present proceedings are an offshoot of the said suit.