Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
HASINUDDIN KHAN AND ANR.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT13/09/1979
BENCH:
ACT:
U.P. High Court (Abolition of Letters Patent Appeals)
Act, 1972 and U.P. High Court (Abolition of Letters Patent
Appeals) (Amendment) Act, 33 of 1972-Constitutional validity
of-Inherent powers of Court to condone delay and permit
additional evidence.
HEADNOTE:
HELD : Neither the U.P. High Court (Abolition of
Letters Patent Appeals) Act, 1962 nor the U.P. High Court
(Abolition of Letters Patent Appeals) (Amendment) Act, 1962,
is unconstitutional. [1208C]
State of Bombay v. Narothamdas, [1951] S.C.R. 51; Union
of India v. Mohindra Supply Co. [1962] 3 S.C.R. 497 and Ram
Adhar Singh v. Ramroop Singh & Ors., [1968] 2 S.C.R. 95;
followed.
[The Court under its inherent powers condoned the delay
in filing of S.L.P. challenging the decision of the High
Court on merits and allowed the petitioner to urge
additional grounds except on constitutional points].
JUDGMENT:
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos.
1394/74, 543/75 and 242/79.
Appeals from the Judgment and Order dated 22-5-1973 of
the Allahabad High Court in Special Appeals Nos. 26/73,
682/72 and 502/72.
AND
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No. 2152 of 1974.
From the Judgment and Order dated 22-5-1973 of the
Allahabad High Court in Spl. Appeal No. 469/72.
J. P. Goyal and S. K. Jain for the Appellants in CA
1394/74.
G. S. Chaterjee for the Petitioners in SLP 2152/74.
A. P. S. Chauhan and V. C. Prashar for the RR 3 & 4 in
CA 1394/ 74.
S. N. Andley, Uma Datta and Tara Chand Sharma for the
Appellants in CA 543/75.
R. N. Dixit for the Appellant in CA 242/79.
E. C. Agarwala for the Respondent in CA 543/75.
1208
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
CHANDRACHUD, C.J.-In view of the Judgment of this Court
in State of Bombay v. Narothamdas, Jethabhai & Anr.(1) Union
of India v. Mohindra Supply Company(2) and Ram Adhar Singh
v. Ramroop Singh & Ors.(3) and in view of the fact that the
Special Leave Petition filed against the judgment rendered
by the High Court of Allahabad, upholding the validity of
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
the 1962 Act was dismissed by the Constitution Bench of this
Court after an elaborate argument, there is no substance in
the contention that either the U.P. High Court (Abolition of
Letters Patent Appeals) Act, 1962 or the U.P. High Court
(Abolition of Letters Patent Appeals) (Amendment) Act, Act
33 of 1972 is unconstitutional. The challenge to these Acts
on the ground of their unconstitutionality is, therefore,
rejected. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants have very fairly conceded that position.
Accordingly, the Civil Appeals and the Special Leave
Petition are dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
However, the appellants may, if so advised, ask for
special leave to appeal from the judgment of the learned
single judge. We are sure that the delay caused in filing
the S.L.Ps in this Court will be condoned since the
appellants were pursuing their remedy by filing these
appeals in this Court.
Learned counsel for the appellant in Civil Appeal No.
543/75 says that the appellant has already filed special
leave petition (Civil) No. 361 of 1976 in this Court
challenging the decision of the learned single judge of the
Allahabad High Court on the merits of the matter. He has
also filed an application seeking leave of this Court for
urging additional grounds and an application for condonation
of delay in filing the Special Leave Petition. The petition
for permission to urge additional grounds, except on
Constitutional points, shall be treated as having been filed
in the S.L.P. These three petitions will be listed before
the Division Bench on 4-10-1979.
S.R.
1209