1964 (2) TMI 7

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n with the application of article 14 before it. The High Court itself pointed out that there was no averment on behalf of the writ petitioners before the High Court (now respondents before us) on the lines on which the argument finally developed at the bearing. It is true that some adjournments were granted by the High Court in this connection ; but we are not satisfied that the case for the application or otherwise of article 14 was properly put before the High Court by either side. We should like also to point out that the High Court seemed to take the view that it was for the State to show that article 14 was not applicable. This is not correct, for it is for the party who comes forward with the allegation that equality before the law or .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution and (2) that the provision relating to Hindu undivided families was discriminatory and denied equal protection of laws and was, therefore, hit by article 14 of the Constitution. The High Court held on the first question that Parliament was competent to include Hindu undivided families in section 3 of the Act. On the second question, the High Court held that though the contention under article 14 had not been taken in the petitions before it in the form in which it was presented at the time of argument, it was open to it to go into the question in view of certain adjournments granted to the parties in this connection and also in view of the fact that the matter had been fully argued befor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o the High Court for further consideration after giving parties an opportunity to place full facts in connection with the application of article 14 before it. The High Court itself pointed out that there was no averment on behalf of the writ petitioners before the High Court (now respondents before us) on the lines on which the argument finally developed at the bearing. It is true that some adjournments were granted by the High Court in this connection ; but we are not satisfied that the case for the application or otherwise of article 14 was properly put before the High Court by either side. We should like also to point out that the High Court seemed to take the view that it was for the State to show that article 14 was not applicable. Thi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X