Hasinuddin Khan & ANR Vs. Deputy
Director of Consolidation & Ors  INSC 178 (13 September 1979)
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.
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,  S.C.R. 51; Union of India v. Mohindra
Supply Co.  3 S.C.R. 497 and Ram Adhar Singh v. Ramroop Singh & Ors.,
 2 S.C.R. 95;
[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
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal
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
AND SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No. 2152
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
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
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 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