3844.txt

The current document is an appeal case in the Indian Supreme Court regarding the powers of a Custodian of Evacuee Property to cancel leases granted by himself under section 12 of the (XXXI of 1950) Act. The case involves the respondent, who is the Custodian, and the appellants, who are displaced persons who entered into a composite agreement with the Custodian for the lease of three mills and a factory. The respondent issued a notice to cancel the lease due to breaches of the terms, but the appellants challenged this notice, arguing that the Custodian had no authority to cancel leases granted by himself. The case was heard by two different judges, with the first judge ruling in favor of the appellants, but a subsequent amendment to the Act gave the Custodian the power to cancel leases granted by himself. The appellants then raised a new contention that the Custodian could not override the contract under which the lease was held. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the Custodian's power to cancel leases was unqualified and absolute, and that it could not be abridged by reference to the non obstante clause. The Court also declined to consider any rights the appellants may have had in relation to the purchase of the mills and the factory, as these were not raised in the initial petition. The appeal was dismissed with costs.