Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court Daily-Wage Employees Treated As Permanent Under 1988 Government Resolution Entitled To Annual Increment Benefits: Supreme Court

Courts Must Satisfy Themselves As to the Existence of Jurisdiction, Even If Not Raised By Parties: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


New Delhi, October 20, 2023 - In a ruling that's expected to have far-reaching implications, the Supreme Court of India emphasized the paramount duty of courts to verify their own jurisdiction in legal matters. The ruling came in a protracted civil appeal involving a property lease dispute between Mumtaz Yarud Dowla Wakf, the appellant, and M/S Badam Balakrishna Hotel Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., the respondents.

The Bench consisting of Justice M. M. Sundresh and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra articulated, "The court must satisfy itself as to the existence of jurisdiction, even if not raised by the parties," echoing the legal maxim "actus curiae neminem gravabit," which translates to "no one shall be prejudiced by an act of the Court."

The litigation, which has spanned several years, started when the appellant executed a 33-year lease deed with respondent no. 2. After the expiration of the lease, the respondents refused to vacate, leading to a cascade of legal proceedings. The Wakf Tribunal initially ruled in favor of the appellant, but a series of appeals and revisions mired the execution of the decree.

In its judgment, the Supreme Court delved deep into the issue of jurisdiction, particularly concerning the Wakf Tribunal. The court highlighted that "Interference with jurisdiction is to be undertaken sparingly," laying stress on the heavy responsibility of a judgment-debtor to establish a decree's inexecutability.

The court also frowned upon the tactic of raising jurisdictional questions at a late stage in the proceedings. Justice Sundresh and Justice Mishra noted that such conduct contributes to the huge backlog of cases in the country. They referred to the principle of "approbate and reprobate," stating that a party "cannot accept and reject the same thing, blow hot and cold, or take advantage of one part while rejecting the rest of a transaction."

Supreme Court set aside the High Court's previous ruling and restored the decision of the Executing Court. The case has not only resolved the pending property dispute but also clarified pivotal aspects of judicial conduct and jurisdiction, likely to be cited in future legal battles.

Date of Decision: 20 October  2023

MUMTAZ YARUD DOWLA WAKF  vs M/S BADAM BALAKRISHNA

Latest Legal News