LONDON: The UK high court on Wednesday ruled in favour of India and the titular 8th Nizam of Hyderabad and his younger brother in a case they had been fighting against Pakistan relating to who has the rights to £35m (Rs 306 crore) stashed away in a British bank account since Partition.India and the titular 8th Nizam and his brother, who are the grandsons of the 7th Nizam, have a confidential settlement on how to split the money.It was the second high-profile victory for Harish Salve while representing India in a case since he won a reprieve for Kulbhushan Jadhav at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Khawar Qureshi QC was Pakistan’s barrister in both cases.The more than 70-year-old dispute centred on a corpus of £1 million and one guinea that on September 20, 1948, had been transferred by the 7th Nizam of Hyderabad’s finance minister, Nawab Moin Nawaz Jung, from a government bank account to another in London held by Pakistan’s then high commissioner to the UK, Habib Ibrahim Rahimtoola. This was during the Indian annexation of the princely state of Hyderabad.The grandson of the 7th Nizam, Turkey-based Mukkaram Jah, and his younger brother Muffakham Jah have laid claim to the fund, saying it had been gifted to them in a trust set up by their grandfather on April 24, 1963. The Pakistan government, on the other hand, says it was a payment made by the erstwhile princely state to Pakistan for arming Hyderabad when it was about to be invaded by India.On July 8, 1954, the 7th Nizam together with the state of Hyderabad issued a writ before the UK high court against Pakistan and Rahimtoola, asking for the £1 million to be returned to them. On July 19, 1955, Rahimtoola got the writ set aside on the premise that the English courts were interfering with Pakistan’s sovereign immunity. The money has stayed frozen in a British bank account ever since and grown to £35 million in the span of seven decades."In 2013, Pakistan felt that with the distance of time, it would bring action against the bank and the bank would pay and it would walk away. But the bank said there were two other claimants — the princes and India. Pakistan issued a notice of discontinuance, but we argued it was against the interests of justice to withdraw and the case came back. Whether they will appeal, I don’t know," Salve said after the verdict.He praised Justice Marcus Smith for drawing up a 140-page judgment on such a complex case in just three months. The two-week trial had ended in June."We had a good case. We won both times," Salve said, referring to the ICJ verdict on Jadhav.Handing down his verdict on Wednesday, Justice Smith said the 7th Nizam was beneficially entitled to the £35 fund, as were the princes and India. "The fund was held by Pakistan through her high commissioner in the UK on trust for Nizam VII and his successors in title. The fund was not held by Rahimtoola personally, nor did either Pakistan or Rahimtoola have any beneficial interest in the fund," he ruled.Salve said: "Historians will be interested in Pakistan publicly acknowledging it was supplying arms. Whether to Nizam’s army or the Razakars militia, I don’t know."Paul Hewitt, partner at Withers LLP in London, who has acted for the 8th Nizam since Pakistan issued proceedings in 2013, said: “I'm afraid that we can't comment on the agreement between India and the Nizam – as flagged in the judgment, the terms of the agreement are confidential. We are delighted that the judgment recognises the 7th Nizam's rights to funds which have been in dispute since 1948. The judgment covers a complex historical and legal set of issues, interpreting facts and events that occurred 70 years ago to establish that the funds, which now amount to £35 million, were always held in trust for our client's grandfather, the 7th Nizam. The judgment also makes important findings on justiciability and whether a nation state can be a trustee. Our client was still a child when the dispute first arose and is now in his 80s. It is a great relief to see this dispute finally resolved in his lifetime."