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.
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. ...
In a rapidly growing business ecosystem, safeguarding sensitive information is paramount. For Indian businesses, Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) have become crucial legal tools to protect trade secrets, proprietary information, client details, and more. This article explores NDAs from an Indian legal ...
The legal profession is more than a career—it is a lifelong commitment to justice, responsibility, and public service. Every advocate begins their journey with ambition, knowledge, and the desire to make a meaningful impact. However, success in the legal profession ...
The Supreme Court has said a five-judge constitution bench will examine whether Parliament can “abrogate the constitutional principles of governance” for the Delhi government by making a law to take away its control over services. The Centre recently issued an ...
In a Criminal Appeal arising out of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the Supreme Court has ruled that once the settlement has been arrived at and the complainant has signed the deed, the proceedings under ...
The Supreme Court has held that the eligibility condition of minimum 75% marks does not promote the object of introducing the sports quota, and such criterion subverts the object and falls afoul of the equality clause in Article 14 of ...