Comentários do leitor

NRI Legal Services Chandigarh - Why to deal with property concerning issues in sale of property without coming to India by Simranjeet Law Associates - Top latest Five NRI Legal Services Urban news

"Elisha Hilson" (2018-12-08)

HOs9SZc.pngFurther it is equally well-settled that the injunction order not being addressed to the court, if the court proceeds in contravention of the injunction order, the proceedings are not a nullity. We do not think that contention is sound merely because sub-s. In the case of a stay order, as it is addressed to the court and prohibits it from proceeding further, as soon as the court has knowledge of the order it is bound to obey it and if it does not, it acts illegally, and all proceedings taken after the knowledge of the order would be a nullity.

(2) lays down that the High Court shall not take cognizance of a contempt alleged to have been committed in respect of a court subordinate to it where such contempt is an offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code. We cannot agree that an order staying execution is similar to an order allowing an appeal and quashing execution proceedings. An order of injunction is generally issued to a party and it is forbidden from doing certain acts.

5 of the Code of Civil Procedure which clearly lays down that mere filling of an appeal does not operate as stay of proceedings in execution, but the appellate court has the power stay of execution. Now, if this argument means that Parliament may abuse its power of amendment conferred by Art. But where a stay order is passed, execution still NRI Legal stands and can go on unless the court executing the decree has knowledge of the stay order.

Then comes the question as to whether the Assistant Regis- trar was a court subordinate to the High Court. This procedure was however not adopted in this case and we need not pause to consider what would have been the effect if the matter had been so transferred. But as the argument was urged with a good deal of force on behalf of the petitioners and was met with equal force on behalf of the Union and the States, we propose NRI Lawyers to deal with it briefly.

227 every High Court shall have superintendence over all courts land tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction. It is interesting to note that under r. fore, amendments either under Art. It is only when the executing court has knowledge of the stay order that the court must stay its hands and anything it does thereafter would be a nullity so NRI Legal services long as the stay order is in force.

(a) or (b) of this definition. The same principle in our opinion applies to the Constitution. It can hardly be said that the court has lost jurisdiction because of some order of which has no knowledge. It will be seen from the said judgments that an amendment of the Constitution is made only by legislative process with ordinary NRI Legal majority or with special majority, as the case may be. It is well-settled that in such a case the party must have knowledge of the injunction order before it could be nrillegalservices penalised for disobeying it.

The foundation ,of the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is provided by the NRI difference in the wording of Arts . " It may be noted here that the appellant's system does not come within the exclusions mentioned in cls. In effect therefore a stay order is more or less in the same position as an order of injunction with one difference. In the premises, an amendment "Of the Constitution can be nothing but "law". 227 and 228 of ,the Constitution.

368 or under other Articles ,axe made only by Parliament by following the legislative process adopted by it ' n making other law,. In both cases knowledge of the 89 party concerned or of the NRI Lawyers court is necessary before the prohibition takes effect. " railway' does not include- (a) a tramway wholly within a municipal area, or (b) any other line of communication wholly situate in one State and declared by Parliament by law not to be a railway.

If the Constitution gives a certain power and its terms are clear, there is no reason why that power should be withheld simply because of possibility of abuse. 3 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952 every High Court shall have and exercise the same jurisdiction, powers and authority, in accordance with the same procedure and practice, in respect of contempts of courts subordinate to it as it has and exercises in respect of contempts ,of itself. Take the case where a stay order has been passed but it is never brought to the notice of the court, and the court carries on proceedings ignorance thereof.

In the case where the execution 'Proceeding. If we may say so, possibility of abuse of any power granted to any authority is always there; It is well-settled so far as ordinary laws are concerned that mere possibility of abuse will not induce courts to hold that the power is not there, if the law is valid and its terms clearly confer the power. 48 authorises the Registrar to refer a dispute for disposal of an arbitrator or arbitrators.

Obviously when the appellate court orders the stay of execution the order can have affect only when it is made known to the executing court. -On the basis of the difference in language between these two Articles it was contended that the legislature in passing the Contempt of Courts Act in 1952 must be taken to have contemplated the cognizance of contempts of such courts only as would be covered by Art. This argument is really a political argument and cannot be taken into account in interpreting Art.

368, all that need be said in reply is that mere possibility of abuse cannot result in courts withholding the power if the Constitution grants it. 368 when its meaning to our mind is clear. is quashed, the order takes effect in immediately and there is nothing left to execute. This to our mind clearly follows from the words of O. The Assistant Registrar had all the powers of a Registrar in this case as noted in the delegation and he was competent to dispose of it in the same manner as the Registrar would have done.

That in our opinion is the only difference between, an order of injunction to a party and an order of stay to a court. 228 if the High Court is satisfied that a cause pending in a court subordinate to it involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution the determination of which is necessary for the disposal -of the case, it shall withdraw the case and may either dispose of the case itself or determine the said question of law and return the case to the court from which the case has been so withdrawn.

Entry 89 of List 1 (Union List), of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution, is as follows : 48 the Registrar transferred it for disposal to the Assistant Registrar and therefore his position was the same as that of a nominee under the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act.