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
Builder–Buyer Disputes in India: Legal Remedies Beyond Court Litigation
Builder–buyer disputes have become one of the most common legal issues in India’s real estate sector. Delays in possession, unilateral changes in project plans, poor construction quality, refund refusals, and misleading commitments have affected thousands of home buyers across the ...
Cheque Case Against Firm’s Partner Can Be Quashed Only On Strong Evidence That He Didn’t Have Any Concern With Issuing Cheque : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court observed that a cheque case against a partner of the firm cannot be quashed under Section 482 CrPC unless there is unimpeachable and incontrovertible evidence that he/she did not have any concern with the issuance of cheques. ...
AI & the Judiciary: Boundaries and Risks
🧠 Introduction: A New Era for Justice Artificial Intelligence (AI) has rapidly entered almost every professional domain — and the legal world is no exception. From predictive analytics to legal research automation, AI is revolutionizing how lawyers, judges, and courts ...
S.106 Transfer Of Property Act | Onus On Tenant To Prove That Premises Was Leased For Manufacturing Purpose: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Vikram Nath, has held that in order to attract the application of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, which requires 6 months’ notice for termination of lease, ...
Supreme Court Seeks Union's Stand Regarding Cryptocurrency
The Centre has told the Supreme Court it is yet to take a decision on a mechanism to regulate cryptocurrencies and effectively investigate related offences. A bench of justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan was told by Additional Solicitor General ...
Supreme Court Issued contempt Notice to Patanjali Ayurved & its MD for Misleading ads On Medicinal Cures
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (February 27) came down heavily on Patanjali Ayurved for continuing to publish misleading advertisements regarding medicinal cures, despite making an assurance to the Court earlier in November last year that no such statements would be ...
Speak With Our
Get a Appointment