INAYAT ULLAH versus THE CUSTODIAN, EVACUEE PROPERTY

INAYAT ULLAH versus THE CUSTODIAN, EVACUEE PROPERTY

The Custodian is empowered to issue a notice under section 7 of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950, on the basis of material and information available to him, and it is not for the Court to assess the adequacy of such information at the stage of issuing notice. The right to copies of the record and evidence arises only after the notice is issued and an enquiry is commenced. Thus, the notice and the refusal to provide copies prior to the enquiry were not illegal.

Parties
Appellant: Inayat Ullah; Respondent: The Custodian, Evacuee Property
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
30 October 1957
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Order of the Madhya Bharat High Court Rejecting a Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Evacuee Property, Jurisdiction of Custodian, Notice and Procedure Under the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, Right to Copies of Documents, Article 226 of the Constitution

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Inayat Ullah

Appellant

The Custodian, Evacuee Property

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Order of the Madhya Bharat High Court Rejecting a Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution

  1. 1 Whether the notice issued under s. 7 of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 was illegal due to lack of proper material or service.
  2. 2 Whether refusal to supply copies of materials on the basis of which notice was issued under s. 7 of the Act to the appellant was improper or unlawful.

Ratio Decidendi

The Custodian is empowered to issue a notice under section 7 of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950, on the basis of material and information available to him, and it is not for the Court to assess the adequacy of such information at the stage of issuing notice. The right to copies of the record and evidence arises only after the notice is issued and an enquiry is commenced. Thus, the notice and the refusal to provide copies prior to the enquiry were not illegal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Notice under section 7 of the Act was not illegal.
  • Refusal to supply copies of material prior to the enquiry was upheld.