Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.21 seconds)The Public Premises (Eviction Of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971
Section 5 in Tamil Nadu Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1975 [Entire Act]
Section 4 in Tamil Nadu Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1975 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Union Of India And Another vs Tulsiram Patel And Others on 11 July, 1985
38. To understand the concept of the Doctrine of Necessity and audi alteram partem, it is useful to extract few paragraphs of the Constitutional Bench judgment in Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel [(1985) 3 SCC 398],
"97. Though the two rules of natural justice, namely, nemo judex in causa sua and nemo judex in causa sua, have now a definite meaning and connotation in law and their content and implications are well understood and firmly established, they are nonetheless not statutory rules. Each of these rules yields to and changes with the exigencies of different situations. They do not apply in the same manner to situations which are not alike. These rules are not cast in a rigid mould nor can they be put in a legal strait-jacket. They are not immutable but flexible. These rules can be adapted and modified by statutes and statutory rules and also by the constitution of the Tribunal which has to decide a particular matter and the rules by which such Tribunal is governed. There is no difference in this respect between the law in England and in India.
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 2 in Tamil Nadu Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1975 [Entire Act]
Suresh Koshy George vs The University Of Kerala & Ors on 15 July, 1968
In India, in Suresh Koshy George v. University of Kerala, this Court observed (at p. 322):
J. Mohapatra & Co And Another vs State Of Orissa And Another on 10 August, 1984
101. Not only, therefore, can the principles of natural justice be modified but in exceptional cases they can even be excluded. There are well-defined exceptions to the nemo judex in causa sua rule as also to the audi alteram partem rule. The nemo judex in causa sua rule is subject to the doctrine of necessity and yields to it as pointed out by this Court in J.Mohapatra & Co. v. State of Orissa. So far as the audi alteram partem rule is concerned, both in England and in India, it is well established that where a right to a prior notice and an opportunity to be heard before an order is passed would obstruct the taking of prompt action, such a right can be excluded.