SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1981 Supreme(SC) 386

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.D. KOSHAL, V. BALAKRISHNA ERADI AND R.B. MISRA, JJ.
State of U.P., Appellant
Versus
Arshad Ali Khan, Respondent.
Civil Appeals Nos. 352 and 353 of 1970
Decided on 18-8-1981.
AND
State of U.P., Appellant
Versus
Abdul Ghaffar, Respondent.

Subject

Constitutional Law - Validity of Legislation

Act Referred

UTTAR PRADESH LAND EVICTION AND RECOVERY OF RENT AND DAMAGES ACT : .

Headnote

U. P. Public Lands (Eviction and Recovery of Rent and Damages) Act, 1959 – Tenant – Eviction - An order of eviction from certain plots of land passed under Act, 1959 was confirmed in appeal by Additional District Judge - Held, Learned counsel for parties are agreed that in view of dictum of this Court in Maganlal Chhaganlal (P.) Ltd. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay, (1975) 1 SCR 1, Act cannot be deemed to suffer from any unconstitutionality. We hold accordingly, accept appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and remand the case to High Court for deciding the other points arising in the petition filed before it for revision of order of learned Additional District Judge - Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT

KOSHAL, J.:— An order of eviction from certain plots of land passed under the U. P. Public Lands (Eviction and Recovery of Rent and Damages) Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was confirmed in appeal by the Additional District Judge, Kumaon. The appellate order wag sought to be revised through an application filed in the Allahabad High Court, a learned single Judge of which held, following a judgment of a Full Bench of that Court in Raja Ram Verma v. State of U. P., 1968 All LJ 595, that the Act was ultra vires of the Constitution in its entirety and that, therefore, the eviction order had to be set aside. The application made by the respondent to the High Court was accepted solely on that ground. The order of the High Court is dated the 30th July, 1969 and it is that order which is impugned in this appeal by special leave.

2. Learned counsel for the parties are agreed that in view of the dictum of this Court in Maganlal Chhaganlal (P.) Ltd. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay, (1975) 1 SCR 1,the Act cannot be deemed to suffer from any unconstitutionality. We hold accordingly, accept the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and remand the case to the High Court for deciding the other points arising in the petition filed before it for revision of the order of the learned Additional District Judge. There will be no order as to costs.

Appeal allowed.

For Citation : AIR 1982 SC 780

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top