Second Appeal is Not a Forum for Rehearing or Reassessment of Evidence: Andhra Pradesh High Court Dismisses Partition Suit Appeal Failure of Justice Must Be Proved, Not Assumed: Calcutta High Court Upholds Murder Conviction Despite Charge Framing Lapse Bail is the Rule, Refusal is an Exception – Right to Liberty Cannot Be Ignored: Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Ivory Coast National in NDPS Case Courts Must Adopt a Justice-Oriented Approach in Matrimonial Cases: Gauhati High Court Condones Delay in Family Court Appeal FIR Quashing | Breath Analyzer Test Alone Cannot Prove Alcohol Consumption: Patna High Court Quashes FIR Under Bihar Prohibition Law Unregistered Writing Cannot Confer Ownership: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Dispute Allegations of Stalking and Criminal Intimidation Must Be Tested at Trial: Gujarat High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Bombay High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Nestlé Officials Over Maggi Noodles Controversy No Shortcuts in NDPS Investigations – J&K High Court Rebukes Casual Approach of Investigating Officers Sessions Court Cannot Order Re-Investigation: Allahabad High Court Quashes Direction Against Jaypee Hospital If Official Witnesses Are Reliable, Independent Corroboration Is Not a Must:  Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds NDPS Conviction No Service Tax Can Be Levied on Sale of Lottery Tickets: Supreme Court Rules That Lottery Distributors Are Not Agents Courts Cannot Be Silent Spectators When Justice Is Denied Due to Procedural Errors:  Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Recall of Bail Rejection Order Section 27 of the Evidence Act Requires Independent Corroboration—Mere Claims by Police Are Not Enough: Supreme Court on Flawed Investigation Confession to Police Is No Confession in Law: Supreme Court Acquits Man, Citing Inadmissibility of Statements Made in Custody Mere 'Last Seen Together' Is Not Enough for Conviction Unless It Forms a Complete Chain of Circumstantial Evidence: Supreme Court Sets Aside Life Sentence in 16-Year-Old Girl’s Murder Failure to Explain Wife’s Death Strengthens Guilt Under Section 106 of Evidence Act" – Supreme Court Restores Conviction in Murder Case Child Witness Testimony Cannot Be Discarded Solely on Grounds of Tutoring: Supreme Court Restores Conviction in Murder Case

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

Similar News