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
Evolving Social and Constitutional Rights for LGBTQ+ Communities
The journey toward equality for LGBTQ+ communities in India has been marked by significant legal and social milestones. From the decriminalization of same-sex relationships to ongoing debates about marriage equality and adoption rights, the evolution of LGBTQ+ rights reflects the ...
Companies Act – Decision To Allot Additional Shares Cannot Be Set Aside Merely Because Promoters Have Also Benefited: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has upheld the largely disproportionate allotment of rights share in favour of one group of shareholders of a private limited company, substantially increasing its shareholding percentage in the company over other group of shareholders.The bench comprisingJustices K.M. ...
Section 47 CPC | Executing Court Can Consider Only Questions Limited To Execution Of Decree; Can't Go Behind Decree: Supreme Court
Lamenting the long delay in the execution of decrees, the Supreme Court observed that under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Executing Court can only go into questions that are limited to the execution of decree and ...
Prashant Mishra, KV Viswanathan Take Oath As Supreme Court Judges
By India, Today News Desk: Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and senior advocate KV Viswanathan were sworn-in as Supreme Court judges on Friday, a day after the Central government cleared the appointment of the advocates. New Union Law Minister Arjun Meghwal took to ...
Understanding Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, a colonial-era law, criminalized "unnatural offenses," including consensual same-sex relationships. However, in a historic judgment on September 6, 2018, the Supreme Court of India decriminalized consensual homosexual acts between adults, marking a significant ...
Grant Of Bail Can't Be Made Dependent On Surrender Of Co-Accused : Supreme Court
A Division Bench of the Supreme Court, while allowing a bail plea, held that the grant of bail to a co-accused person cannot be contingent on the surrender of another accused who is also pertinently the main accused in the ...
Speak With Our
Get a Appointment