MAHARAJA KUMAR KHARAK SINGH (DEAD) THOUGH L.RS. ETC. versus STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [1995] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 152 · Decided: 09-05-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
MAHARAJA KUMAR KHARAK SINGH 
(DEAD) THOUGH L.RS. ETC. 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB 
MAY 9, 1995 
[KULDIP SINGH AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.) 
Constitution of India-Article 363(1}-Bar to inteiference by court.s--
Merger of State of Nabha--Covenant-Ru/er or State of Nabha allowed state 
, C property to vest in State of PEPSu--Private parties claiming Nabha's State 
property-Suit for recovery of possession-Whether maintainable in an ordi-
nary Court of law-Held, no. 
With the coming into force of the Indian Independence Act, 1947, the 
State of Nabha along with other princely States in India got out of British 
D Paramountcy and become a free independent State. The Ruler of Nabha 
and the Rulers of other States who desired to establish a Union of States 
by the name of Patiala and East Punjab States Union (PEPSU), entered 
into a covenant, according to which the territory of Nabha State ceased to 
exist and became a part of the territory of the PEPSU. Subsequently, with 
E the coming to force of the State Regulation Act, 1956, PEPSU, having got 
merged in the State of Punjab, all its territory which include the territory 
of Nabba State, became a part of the territory of the Punjab State. 
The appellants who were the brother of the then Ruler of erstwhile 
of Nabha State, along after its accession to Indian Dominion and its 
F subsequent merger in PEPSU in State of Punjab, filed two original suits 
for recovery of possession of 'Bir Bhadson' from the State of Punjab. The 
cause of action for those suits was founded on a letter said to have been 
addressed to the appellant G by the then Ruler of erstwhile Nabha State 
giving grant of the 'Bir Bhadson' in favour of his two brothers, expressing 
G therein his desire that the 'Bir' could be divided equally between him and 
his brother. 
It was pleaded that both the appellants had become the grantees of 
'Bir' acquiring title thereto and were, therefore, entitled to get possession 
of the same from the State of Nabha before its merger in PEPSU and from 
H PEPSU after the merger of State of Nabha in it and from the State of 
152 
MAHARAJAKR.KHARAKSINGHv. STATE OF PB. 
153 
Punjab after the merger of PEPSU in it. Since both PEPSU and the State A 
of Punjab did not give possession of the said 'Bir' to plaintiffs despite 
several requests made by them, the suit were being filed for recovery of 
possession of the same from the State of Punjab, the ultimate successor 
of State of Nabha, within a period of 12 years from the date of the letter. 
The suits were decreed. Appeals filed against the said decrees were allowed. B 
The District Judge held that non-recognition of the rights of the plaintiffs 
in regard to the grant of land covered in the letter was in act of state and 
hence adjudicaticn by a Municipal Court upon the correctness of such an 
act of State was beyond its competence. Consequently, it concluded that 
the grant was neither binding nor enforceable against the State. The 
plaintiffs filed appeals against the judgments and decrees made by the C 
District Judge. The High Court dismissed them agreeing substantially with 
the findings of the District Judge. Hence these appeals. 
Dismissing these appeals, this Court 
Held : 1.1. The letter which was claimed by plaintiffs-appellants as D 
grant of 'Bir' consisting of land and. building - a State property of Nabha, 
made in their favour by its Ruler at the time in exercise of his sovereign 
power could not be construed as a grant of the Nabha State's property 
when the contents of that letter, which did not say that 'Bir' a state 
property of Nabha State sought to be given to Mabaraja Gurbax Singh of E, 
Nabha by his brother, Maharaja Pratap Singh, was given as a grant, as 
the sovereign Ruler of Nabha State and when Maharaja Pratap Singh. 
P.W. 1, the author of the letter did not speak in support of such grant in 
his evidence. [158-G-H, 159-A) 
1.2. The letter even if was assumed to constitute grant of 'Bir', the F 
State property of Nabha State made by the then Ruler, in favour of bis 
brother on April 25, 1948, as was held by courts below, that grant according 
to aforesaid categorical admission of the appellant was not accepted by 
him till he returned from America to India in November, 1948. Because of 
I 
the non-acceptance of the grant of Bir, that 'Bir' continued 10 be the State G 
property of Nabha State till May 8, 1948, when covenant for bringing into 
existence of State of PEPSU was signed and further uptil August 2

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.