STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. MEER BAKSH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants.

(2.) The predecessor-in-title of the respondents who was the holder of the property was one Sultan Mohammad. The appellant-State contended that the property held by the said person is an evacuee property within the meaning of Sec. 2(f) of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 (for short "the 1950 Act") as the said Sultan Mohammad was an evacuee within the meaning of clause (d) of Sec. 2 of the 1950 Act.

(3.) After having perused the judgment of the learned Single Judge, we find the learned Judge has held that it was categorically admitted by the State in its reply that the said Sultan Mohammad never left for Pakistan. It is not shown to us that the reply does not contain such admission.