BHAIRABENDRA NARAYAN BHUP Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE questions involved in this appeal are: (1) whether there was a cause of action for the suit; and (2) whether the notice under Section 80, Civil P. C. was adequate and valid. The point whether such a notice was actually served upon the defendant does not at present arise. These questions were taken up at a preliminary stage and answered against the plaintiff by the learned District Judge, Lower Assam Districts, who dismissed the suit; and hence the present appeal.

(2.) IN the action, the plaintiff sued for declaration that a certain Bill, which subsequently be came an Act, was ultra vires the Provincial Legislature, and that it offended against the provisions of Section 299, Government of India Act, 1935, and also that in any event the bill in question did not apply to the Estate of the plaintiff which was held under a special contract with the Government of India. The Province of Assam was a party defendant to the suit actually came to be instituted on 28 -11 - 1949. The cause of action, according to the plaint, is said to have arisen on 31 -3 -1949, when the Bill was passed by the Assam Legislature and also on 9 -11 -1949, when the Act was published in the Assam Gazette.

(3.) IT appears that the Assam Management of Estates Bill, after being passed by the Assam Legislature, was reserved by the Governor of the Province for the assent of the Governor General, which assent was given to the Bill on 25 -10 -1949, and the Assam Management of Estates Act (Act 17 of 1949) was published as such in the Assam Gazette on 9 -11 -1949. Under the provisions of the Act, Sub -section (3) of Section 1, it was to come into force on such date as the Provincial Government might by notification appoint in this behalf, and such a notification was issued by the Government on 12 -11 -1949. The Act had thus come into operation before the suit came to be filed on the 28th of that month.