NARSINGHBUX Vs. JOSHI NANDKISHORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a miscellaneous application by Narsinghbux.

(2.) AT the time of the Jaipur State, under the Jaipur Civil Procedure Code there was a special provision regarding the execution of the decrees passed against State grantees and according to that procedure the Chief Court or the High Court of Jaipur had to fix an annuity in respect of each such grantee, which was to be distributed among all the decree-holders seeking execution against such State grantee. It is said there were civil decrees against the estate of Narsinghbux and Narainbux, who are two brothers and who are State grantees. The property, which was a State grant, belonging to both of them was leased first under the orders of the Jaipur Chief Court and then under the orders of the Jaipur High Court. The order with which we are concerned is dated the 29th September 1948. It was made by a Division Bench of the Jaipur High Court. By that order the State grant belonging to the judgment-debtors was leased to Narainbux on the condition of paying annually an amount of Rs. 2450/-, out of which 50% was to be paid to the judgment-debtors for their maintenance and the remaining portion was to be distributed among the several decree-holders through the court. During the time of the Jaipur Administration this arrangement continued but after the merger of the Jaipur State into the State of Rajasthan and after the coming into force of the Civil Procedure Code of 1908 the lessee wanted to make a deposit of the annuity and filed an application to that effect in the court of the Civil Judge, Jaipur City, on the 1st of August 1951, but the court refused to accept the amount saying that the Bachat rules were not in force and the court could not accept the amount under those rules. The lessee being dissatisfied with that order has filed an application in this court and it has been urged on his behalf that he holds the property from the court and as per terms of the contract it is his duty to pay the amount in court and should be permitted to make a deposit in accordance with the terms of the lease, the term of which had not yet expired. The lease, it may be mentioned here, was for five years and it would come to an end some time in the year 1953. Narainbux has opposed the application of Narsinghbux on the ground that the order which had been made by the Jaipur High Court at that time was not in accordance with the Bachat rules and that order should not be enforced now.