GORKHA RAM AND OTHERS versus THE CUSTODIAN GENERAL OF INDIA, DELHI
Fakira, a non-proprietor, had no tenancy or occupancy right in the site under the wajib-ul-arz; section 18(1) of the Act does not apply to him. Thus, the house reverted to the proprietors upon his migration, and it could not vest in the Custodian.
- Parties
- Appellants: Gorkha Ram and others; Respondents: The Custodian General of India, Delhi
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 21 April 1961
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order Dated July 3, 1953, of the Punjab High Court in Civil Writ Application No. 256 of 1952
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Custodian Powers, Tenancy, Occupancy Rights, Property Rights of Evacuees, Wajib Ul Arz Interpretation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Gorkha Ram and others
Appellants
The Custodian General of India, Delhi
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order Dated July 3, 1953, of the Punjab High Court in Civil Writ Application No. 256 of 1952
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Fakira had any right in the property which could vest in the Custodian on becoming an evacuee
- 2 Applicability of s. 18(1) of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 to Fakira's rights
Ratio Decidendi
Fakira, a non-proprietor, had no tenancy or occupancy right in the site under the wajib-ul-arz; section 18(1) of the Act does not apply to him. Thus, the house reverted to the proprietors upon his migration, and it could not vest in the Custodian.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- Setting aside the order of the Court below
- Allowing the petition
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment