https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168642 Section 87-B of the Code of Civil Procedure was upheld as a valid classification for former Indian Rulers because the immunity from civil suit reflected historical and constitutional assurances tied to their personal rights, privileges and dignities, and therefore did not violate Article 14. The word "sued" was construed to include not only institution of a suit but also its continuance, so a pending action against an ex-Ruler could not proceed without the Central Government's consent after the provision came into force. The third defendant was not treated as an agent of the ex-Ruler under section 230(3) of the Indian Contract Act, as his role was confined to a ministerial act of signing letters. en-us Mon, 03 Apr 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Mar 2015 11:02:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168642 Section 87-B of the Code of Civil Procedure was upheld as a valid classification for former Indian Rulers because the immunity from civil suit reflected historical and constitutional assurances tied to their personal rights, privileges and dignities, and therefore did not violate Article 14. The word "sued" was construed to include not only institution of a suit but also its continuance, so a pending action against an ex-Ruler could not proceed without the Central Government's consent after the provision came into force. The third defendant was not treated as an agent of the ex-Ruler under section 230(3) of the Indian Contract Act, as his role was confined to a ministerial act of signing letters. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 03 Apr 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168642