GANAPATRAO SHANKARRAO INDULKAR Vs. STATE OF BOMBAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LANDS S. Nos. 15, 16, 17, 189, 190 342, 268, 335, Pot. 2, 224, 292, 162 Pot. 2, and three houses at Vaghapur and lands S. Nos. 78 and 80 of the village of Vangutti, were originally regarded as Sheri Service lands of the Ghorpade family. On 20th November 1920, His Highness Shahu Chhatrapati Maharaja of Kolhapur, passed Huzur Tharav, No. 460, forfeiting the lands holding that the Ghorapades were unaulhorizedly in occupation. By an order passed in the year 1924, Ex. 48, some of the forfeited lands and certain other lands situate at Hanimaal, Chikhalwal and Chinchwat were granted to the plaintiff's father Shankarrao Abajirao Indulkar in Inam for services rendered by him. Shankarrao Abajirao Indulkar- who will hereafter for the sake of brevity be refer red to as Indulkar - continued in possession of the lands till the year 1942. His Highness Chha-trapati Shahu Maharaja died sometime in Or about the year 1940, and his successor being a minor, a Regency Council was constituted to carry on the administration of the State. On 19th November 1942, Ghorpade applied to the Regency Council to review the order of forfeiture passed in the year 1920. On 21st September 1943, the Regency Council ordered that the previous decision of the Maharaja be cancelled and the lands, which were taken from the Ghorpade family, be restored to them. Against that order, Indulkar appealed to the Resident on 31st August 1944. The appeal of Indulkar was allowed by the Resident, and the Order of the Regency Council was vacated. Against that order Ghorpade appealed to the Crown Representative in India, and on 7th February, 1947 the Crown Representative set aside the Order of the Resident, and restored the order of the Regency Council and accordingly the order of forfeiture stood vacated. But the Crown Representative recommended that reasonable compensation for loss of land be given to Indulkar. Against that order, Indulkar appealed to the Secretary of State in Council, on 12th August 1947. On 10 th August 1947, the paramount authority of the British Crown having lapsed by the enactment of the Indian Independence Act the papers of the appeal were returned to His Highness the Maharaj'a of Kolhapur, with a request to deal with the appeal. On 12th November 1947, His Highness the Maharaja of Kolhapur confirmed the order which was passed by the Crown Representative, but, as suggested by the Crown Representative, an amount of Rs. 66,666 was awarded as compensation to Indulkar by capitalizing rental of Rs. 2,000 per acre at the rate of 3 per cent. Thereafter, on 1st February 1949, there was a merger agreement between the Ruler of the Kolhapur State and the Government of India, and on 1st March 1949 the Kolhapur State merged with the Bombay Province. On 1st March 1949, the Government of India published under the authority vested in it by the Extra Provincial Jurisdiction Act two Orders-one the Administration of Kolhapur State Order, and the other "kolhapur State (Application of Laws) Order. " By the first Order, provision was made for the administration of the State, and by the second Order, divers Acts which were in force in the Bom bay State and which were enacted either by the Bombay State legislature or by the Central Legislature were made applicable to the area of the former Kolhapur State. By clause (4) of that order it was provided that the Statutes referred. to in Parts I and II of the Schedule were to come into force as from 1st May 1949, and by clause (5) it was provided by the first paragraph :

(2.) THE plaintiffs, who are the representatives of Indulkar, served a notice under section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code, upon the Government of Bombay, and by Suit No. 1 of 1952, claimed to re cover Rs. 1,10,775 as compensation with interest at the rate of 6 per cent, on the plea that they were entitled to recover the amount from the State of Bombay under the order passed by the Maharaja of Kolhapur on 12th November 1947, the State of Bombay being the successor to the Maharaja of Kolhapur.

(3.) THIS suit was resisted by the State of Bombay on diverse grounds. It was contended that the suit against the State of Bombay as a successor Government was not maintainable in law; that the grant of Inam by the Maharaja after forfeiting the lands was not legal; that the plaintiffs were not entitled to any compensation at the time of the restoration of the lands to Ghorpade; that the order passed by the Crown Representative to pay compensation was merely recommendatory and the affirmation thereof by the Maharaja of Kolhapur did not give rise to any enforceable obligation; that in any event, the-order of His Highness the Maharaja for payment of compensation to the plaintiffs was not enforceable against the State of Bombay; that the Order of the State of Bombay refusing to pay the amount was not against the rules of natural justice, that the State of Bombay was not estopped from denying the plain tiffs' right, and that it was open to the successor Government to repudiate the order of His Highness the Maharaja. It was also contended that the suit was barred under Articles 115 and 14 of the Limitation Act.