Section 87B — Application of sections 85 and 86 to Rulers of former Indian States
When the princely States merged into India, their Rulers kept a residue of the foreign-Ruler protections — but only for old claims. For a suit on a cause of action that arose before 26 January 1950, § 85 and § 86(1) & (3) apply to a former Indian Ruler as they do to the Ruler of a foreign State.
How to read Section 87B
The bridge
A Ruler of a former Indian State is treated, for limited purposes, like the Ruler of a foreign State — a transitional carry-over after the States merged into India.
Only old claims, only some provisions
It applies only where the cause of action arose before the Constitution (26 Jan 1950) — and only § 85 and § 86(1) & (3) apply, not the whole of § 86.
The definitions (2)
“Former Indian State” = one the Central Government notifies in the Gazette; commencement of the Constitution = 26 Jan 1950; “Ruler” = the Article 363 meaning.
The bare Act
1(1) In the case of any suit by or against the Ruler of any former Indian State which is based wholly or in part upon a cause of action which arose before the commencement of the Constitution or any proceeding arising out of such suit, the provisions of section 85 and sub-sections (1) and (3) of section 86 shall apply in relation to such Ruler as they apply in relation to the Ruler of a foreign State.
(2) In this section—
1. Sub-section (1) substituted by Act 54 of 1972, s. 3 (w.e.f. 9-9-1972). 2. The word “and” omitted, ibid. 3. Clause (b) substituted by clauses (b) and (c), ibid. — the 1972 recast followed the de-recognition of the former Rulers (Constitution 26th Amendment).
Key terms decoded
A princely/Indian State, now merged into India, that the Central Government has specified by Gazette notification for the purposes of this section.
Has the same meaning as in article 363 of the Constitution — the person recognised as the Ruler of such a State.
The temporal gate: the claim must rest, wholly or in part, on facts arising before 26 January 1950.
Defined here as 26 January 1950 — the day the Constitution came into force.
The only provisions carried over: appointed agents (§ 85), consent to sue (§ 86(1)) and the execution bar (§ 86(3)) — not § 86(2),(4),(5),(6).
For those old claims, the former Indian Ruler stands in the shoes of a foreign Ruler under §§ 85–86(1),(3).
The picture — a transitional bridge
A narrow, transitional bridge: for pre-Constitution claims only, a former Indian Ruler is given the foreign-Ruler treatment under § 85 and the two consent provisions of § 86 — nothing more.
Section 87B, part by part
How the two sub-sections work as one body
Carry over → then define the limits
For pre-Constitution claims, a former Indian Ruler gets § 85 and § 86(1) & (3) — the foreign-Ruler treatment, in part.
The terms that fix its reach: Gazette-specified State, the 26-Jan-1950 line, and the Article 363 meaning of “Ruler”.
Connected provisions
Section 87B closes Part IV’s aliens & foreign-sovereigns group (§§ 83–87B). It borrows from § 85 (appointed agents) and § 86(1) & (3) (consent to sue; execution bar), using the definitions in § 87A — and applies them, for old claims, to the Rulers of former Indian States.