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
Petition Against IIT Eligibility Criteria Of 75% In Class 12 Dismissed
A vacation bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K V Vishwanathan said this prerequisite existed earlier as well and it was not inclined to intervene in the matter. New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a plea challenging the ...
SC Ruling On User Development Fee Provides Guidance For GST, Tax On Royalty
The SC had held that UDF collected by the DIAL is in the nature of statutory levy and the same would not be taken as consideration against any services.A recent judgment by the Supreme Court (SC) on the user development fee (UDF) collected by the Delhi International Airport Limited (DIAL) ...
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. ...
International Arbitration: Navigating Cross-Border Disputes with ADR
As global business transactions increase, so do the risks of cross-border disputes. When parties from different countries find themselves in conflict, traditional litigation can be slow, costly, and fraught with jurisdictional complexities. This is where Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)—specifically, international ...
BREAKING | Arbitration Clauses In Unstamped Agreements Enforceable : Supreme Court 7-Judge Bench Overrules 'NN Global' Decision
A seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court on Wednesday (December 13) ruled that arbitration clauses in unstamped or inadequately stamped agreements are enforceable. Insufficiency of stamping does not make the agreement void or unenforceable but makes it inadmissible in evidence. ...
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 ...
Speak With Our
Get a Appointment