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
Understanding Indian Constitutional Laws: A Brief Overview
Introduction: Indian Constitutional Law is the backbone of the country's legal system, laying down the framework for governance, rights, and duties of citizens, and the functioning of various institutions. Enshrined in the Constitution of India, adopted on January 26, 1950, ...
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. ...
Documents Can Be Produced During Cross-Examination In Civil Trial To Confront Party To Suit Or Witness : Supreme Court
In a notable judgment, the Supreme Court has held that a document can produced during cross-examination in a civil trial to confront a party to the suit or a witness. The Court also held that there is no distinction between ...
Empowering Dispute Resolution: How Technology is Shaping the Future of ADR
🎯 The Role of Technology in Enhancing ADR Processes The advent of technology has transformed virtually every industry, and the field of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is no exception. ADR processes, including mediation, arbitration, and negotiation, have traditionally relied on ...
DBS Bank Directors Can’t Be Prosecuted For Acts Of Lakshmi Vilas Bank Before Amalgamation : Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case
The Supreme Court today ruled that DBS Bank and its directors, who were appointed after the amalgamation with Lakshmi Vilas Bank(LVB) and had their appointments approved by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), cannot be held criminally liable for actions ...
Maternity Benefits Must Be Granted Even If Period Of Benefit Overshoots Term Of Contractual Employment: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Thursday(17 Aug) held that maternity benefits have to be granted even if the period of benefit overshoots the term of contractual employment. Maternity benefits can travel beyond the term of contractual employment. The court directed the ...
Speak With Our
Get a Appointment