BABULAL Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE eight appeals raise a common question for determination, namely, the maintainability of the appellant's suits for want of notice under S. 80, Civil P. C. Each of the appellants sued in the Court of Civil Judge first Class, Gwalior, to restrain the Government from auctioning certain lands, claiming that he was entitled to continue in possession of the land as a 'Pacca' tenant and that the Government had no right to auction his land and allot it to any one else.

(2.) IN these second appeals Mr. Parashar, learned counsel for the appellants urged that it was not necessary for any of the plaintiffs to give notice to the Government under S. 80, Civil P. C. because the plaintiff's suits for injunction were not based on past acts but were with regard to a contemplated or threatened action of the Government. Mr. Parashar relied on two decisions of the Madras High Court - -'Arunachalam Chetty v. Official Receiver, Ramnad', : AIR 1927 Mad 166 (A), and 'Krishna Swami v. Syed Ahmad',, 136 Ind Cas 777 Mad (B). I am unable to accede to this contention.