THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH versus SHRI MOULA BUX AND OTHERS

Citation: [1962] 2 S.C.R. 794 · Decided: 05-05-1961 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.L. KAPUR · Disposal: Dismissed
Cited by 3 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

1961 
JJf ay, 5. 
794 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1962] 
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH 
'V. 
SHRI MOULA BUX AND OTHERS 
(.J.L. KAPUR, K. SunnA RAo, M. HrnAYATULLAH, 
.T .. C. SHAH ancl RAGHUBAH DAYAL, JJ.) 
Cii:il J1roced-ure-}Jartics-1.'luif aga.inst Governrnent 
of !'art C Staie-Aitl/wrily to be named as defendani-
Code of. Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), s. 79-rJenaal 
Ula11ses Act, 78!!7 (X of 1897). ss. 3(3), 3(8), ii(58) and 
3(60)-Government of Part U Stafos Act, 1951 (49 of 1951) 
8. 38 (2). 
The respondents obtained a lease for plucking tendu 
leaves from the Government of Vindhya Pradesh. Later, the 
Government cancelled the lease and sought to recover the 
balance of the lease money. 
The respondents filed a suit for 
damages and for injunction restraining the Government from 
recovering the balance of the lease money and impleaded the 
State of Vindhya Pradesh as the defendant. They contended 
that the suit was incompetent as the proper defendant was the 
Union of India and not the State of Vindhya Pradesh. 
Held, that the State ofVindhya Pradesh was the proper 
defendant to be sued and that the suit was properly filed. 
Under s. 3 (58) of the General Clauses Act "State" meant 
inte.r alia a Part C State and under Art. 239 (1) the Part C 
State was administered hy a Lieutenant Governor if the Pre•i-
dent so ordered. Thus Part C States hacL a separate existence 
and were not merged with the Central Government. 
Though 
•State Government' was definei bys. 3(60) i!rid in relation to a 
Part C State as 
th~ Central Government the definition of 
'Central Government' in relation to the administration of a 
Part C State meant the Lieutenant Governor within the scope 
of the authority under Art. 239 and thus the State Government. 
Thus cl. (b) of s. 79 applied and not cl. (a). 
Satya Deo v. Padam Deo, (1955\ l S. C.R. 549, 
referred to. 
CIVIL ANPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal 
No. 127 of 1959. 
Appeal from the Judgment and decree dated 
Febr11ary 2, 1956, of the Court of the Judicial Com-
missioner, Vindhya Pradesh, in R.eview Application 
No. 15 of 1955. 
c.. •
2 S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
795 
B. Sen, B. K. B. Naidu and /. N. Shroff, for 
1962 
the appellant. 
The State of 
Madhya Pradesh 
G. C. Mathur, for the respondents. 
1961. May 5. The Judgment of the Court was 
delivered by 
HrnAYATULLAH, J. This is 'ln appeal by the 
State of Madhya Pradesh, which st'J.nds substituted 
for the State of Vindhya Pradesh under the States 
Reorganisation, Act, 1956, and is directed against 
an order of the Judicial Commissioner, Rewa, by 
which hll modified, on review, his judgement and 
decree in a civil suit filed by the 
respondents 
against the State of Vindhya Pradesh. The appeal 
has been filed on a certificate granted by tho 
Judicial Commissioner, Rewa. 
The only question urged in this appeal is that 
the suit brought against the State of Vindhya 
Pradesh was defective, because the proper defen-
dant was the Union of India. Since the question 
is one of law, it relieves us of the duty of narrati11g 
all the facts. .Brief' i stated, the suit was for 
damages valued at lea. 1,00,000/- and for a perma-
nent injunction against the State 
of Vindhya 
Pradesh. The suit was filed in the following 
circumstances: The respo11<lants are bidi merchants, 
and for that purpose, had obtained on October 18, 
1951 from the Divisional Forest Officer, Rewa, a 
lease for plucking and appropriating ten<lu leaves 
from the Makund1mr Range for three years, com-
mencing from October 18, 1951 on payment of 
Rs. 1,63,000/- per year (Ex. P. 85). For some 
reasons into which it is not necessary to go, this 
contract w1s cancelled, and the right was put up 
for auction, but no bidders came. The Government 
therefore, demanded t.hc yearly instalments, claim-
ing them under tho contract as the difference 
between the original contract amount less the 
v. 
Shri Mou/a 
Bux and others 
M. Hidayatullah 
J. 
1961 
'l'hr: /'}tale c!f 
Jlacl!1y" Pmd<•h 
v. 
8hri 1l!ou.la Bux 
and others 
JI. llidayatullah 
J. 
7!)6 
:-ilJPHEJ\lE COFHT REPORTS 
[I 962] 
amount fetched by way of freHh auction, whieh was 
nil. 
The snit wan filed for a perpetual injunction 
against thi,; daim :md for <lamages on t,Jrn :iverment 
that the State of Viudhya Pradesh was guilty of 
breach of tho contract. 
The trial Judge doereed both the parts of the 
<·.Jaim, placing the d:miages at Rs. 36,570/-. Appeals 
were filed by both sidus 'liefore the Judicial Com-
missioner,
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.