Trijugi Narain (D) Thr.LRs. & Ors. v. Sankoo (D) Thr. LRs. & Ors.
Background
The case concerned a leasehold plot in Allahabad originally acquired in the 1870s that eventually passed to Raghubir Singh, the Maharaja of the former princely State of Maihar, and later to his successor Brij Nath Singh. Brij Nath Singh willed most of his properties, including this plot, to his second wife Rani Tej Kumari rather than to his elder son Govind Singh, who nevertheless sold the property to the appellants' predecessors as if it were ordinary joint Hindu family property he was entitled to deal with as "karta." Rival buyers who traced their title through Rani Tej Kumari's subsequent sale sued, and the dispute turned on whether the property was impartible estate property (which a Ruler could freely will away) or coparcenary joint family property (in which his son would have an automatic birthright by inheritance).
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that the property was part of the impartible estate of the former sovereign ruler of Maihar, not ordinary coparcenary property, because under the well-established rule of primogeniture governing princely estates, such property is "clothed with the incidents of self-acquired and separate property" even though it is ancestral, meaning the ruler can freely transfer or bequeath it, and no family member has a birthright claim to it. The Court traced this doctrine through a long line of precedent (including Constitution Bench authority) establishing that this personal law of succession survived the merger of princely states into India and was constitutionally protected. It rejected the appellants' argument that a leasehold plot located outside the actual princely territory could not be treated as sovereign/impartible property, noting that similar leasehold properties located outside princely states had been treated as impartible estate property in earlier rulings, and that the appellants had not produced evidence to rebut this presumption. Accordingly, Brij Nath Singh's will bequeathing the property to Rani Tej Kumari was valid, Govind Singh had no right to sell it, and the appeals were dismissed, affirming the High Court.
Lesson Learnt
Properties belonging to former princely rulers that formed part of their impartible estate remain governed by the personal-law rule of primogeniture even today: such a ruler's will or sale of the property is valid, and descendants cannot claim an automatic inheritance right in it the way they could with ordinary joint Hindu family property.