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
Adolescent Privacy Rights: A Critical Issue in India’s Evolving Digital Landscape
The rapid advancement of technology has transformed the lives of adolescents in India, providing unprecedented access to information, social connectivity, and learning tools. However, this digital revolution has also created a complex challenge—safeguarding the privacy of adolescents who are increasingly ...
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 ...
Motor Accident Claims | No Right To Recovery For Insurer Merely Because Vehicle Owner Didn't Verify Driver's License : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Monday (30th October) held that an insurance company cannot claim that it is not liable to pay compensation in a motor vehicle accident claim just because the vehicle owner did not verify the genuineness of the ...
Recruitment Process -Last Date To Fulfil Eligibility Criteria Is Last Date To Submit Applications, In The Absence Of Any Specific Rule: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court emphasized that where there is an absence of any specific rule or prescription, the last day for fulfilling eligibility is the last date of submission of the application. The Court made the observation while refusing the benefit ...
Cheque Bounce Case Can Be Quashed U/S 482 Only If Amount Is Patently Non-Recoverable; Whether Debt Time-Barred Or Not Is A Question Of Evidence : SC
The Supreme Court observed that the question whether a cheque was issued towards a time barred debt is to be decided on evidence. “It is only in cases wherein an amount which is out and out non-recoverable, towards which a ...
EVMs Non-Tamperable, Demand For 100% VVPAT Verification Regressive: Election Commission Tells Supreme Court
Ahead of the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has staunchly defended electronic voting machines (EVM) as ‘non-tamperable’, both owing to technological measures and strict administrative and security procedures designed by the commission. In a recent ...
Speak With Our
Get a Appointment