Can’t Seek Immunity From Legal Provisions Because Contract
Can’t Seek Immunity From Legal Provisions Because Contract In President’s Name: SC
|
Defending the Centre, ASG argued that the contract in the case stands on a different footing as it is entered into in the name of the President.
The Union of India cannot demand an immunity from the operation of pertinent legal provisions just because a contract is in the name of the President of India, the Supreme Court ruled on Friday.
A bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala, interpreted Article 299 of the Constitution to hold that the central government, as a party to a contract, cannot wriggle out of statutory bars by arguing that the contract is in the name of the President of India.
Article 299 provides that all contracts in the exercise of the executive power of the union or of a State shall be expressed to be made by the President or by the Governor of the State, and all such contracts will be executed by a person duly authorized in that behalf.
“Having considered the purpose and object of Article 299, we are of the clear opinion that a contract entered into in the name of the President of India, cannot and will not create an immunity against the application of any statutory prescription imposing conditions on parties to an agreement, when the Government chooses to enter into a contract,” held the judgment, authored by justice Narasimha.
Post Categories
Featured Posts
Latest Posts
Latest Posts
An In-Depth Look at Environmental and Sustainability Law
In today's rapidly changing world, environmental and sustainability law has become a cornerstone of global legal practices. With increasing awareness of climate change, resource depletion, and environmental degradation, these laws are essential for promoting sustainable development and protecting our planet ...
2020 Delhi Riots: SC Dismisses Delhi Police’s Pleas Against HC Verdicts Granting Bail To Three Student Activists
The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed the pleas filed by the Delhi Police against the bail granted to three student activists in the 2020 North East Delhi riots case. A bench of Justices S K Kaul and A Amanullah passed the order ...
Supreme Court Questions Effectiveness Of Delhi's 'Odd-Even' Scheme In Controlling Pollution
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (November 7) questioned the effectiveness of the Delhi Government's "odd-even" scheme in controlling air pollution, while terming it as “optics”. Under this scheme, vehicles with license plate numbers ending in an even digit are allowed ...
Buyer Not Complying With Timeline For Payment Can't Seek Specific Performance Of Agreement To Sell : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court in a recent decision held that when a contract stipulates a specific time frame within which the consideration needs to be paid by the 'buyer' to execute the 'agreement to sale' by the 'seller', then the buyer ...
The Supreme Court’s Ruling on Same-Sex Marriage: What’s Next?
As legal professionals, we recognize the profound implications of the Supreme Court of India's recent deliberations on same-sex marriage. While the Court refrained from granting full marriage equality, the discussions have paved the way for significant legal discourse on LGBTQ+ ...
Children Of Invalid Marriages Have Right In Their Parents’ Share In Hindu Joint Family Property : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Friday (September 1) pronounced a judgment recognizing the rights of children born out of invalid marriages in their parents’ share in Hindu joint family property. The Court held that children born out of void/voidable marriages are ...
Speak With Our
Get a Appointment