Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.27 seconds)
Aegon Life Insurance Company Ltd vs Murti Devi on 22 December, 2023 cites

Dalmia Jain Airways Ltd. vs Sukumar Mukherjee on 30 August, 1950

"12. This power of superintendence conferred by Article 227 is, as pointed out by Harries C.J., in Dalmia Jain Airways Ltd. v. Sukumar Mukherjee [AIR 1951 Cal 193] , to be exercised most sparingly and only in appropriate cases in order to keep the subordinate courts within the bounds of their authority and not for correcting mere errors. As rightly pointed out by the Judicial Commissioner in the case before us the lower courts in refusing to make an order for ejectment acted arbitrarily. The lower courts realised the legal position but in effect declined to do what was by Section 13(2)(i) incumbent on them to do and thereby refused to exercise jurisdiction vested in them by law. It was, therefore, a case which called for an interference by the Court of the Judicial Commissioner and it acted quite properly in doing so. In our opinion there is no ground on which in an appeal by special leave under Article 136 we should interfere. The appeal, therefore, must stand dismissed with costs."
Calcutta High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 349 - Full Document

Shalini Shyam Shetty & Anr vs Rajendra Shankar Patil on 23 July, 2010

11. Similarly, the Apex Court in Shalini Shyam Shetty v. Rajendra Shankar Patil, (2010) 8 SCC 329, has held that the High Courts cannot, at the drop of a hat, in exercise of its power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution, interfere with the orders of tribunals or courts inferior to it. Nor can it, in exercise of this power, act as a court of appeal over the orders of the court or tribunal subordinate to it. The Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment has held that the object of superintendence, both administrative and judicial, is to maintain efficiency, smooth and orderly functioning of the entire machinery of justice in such a way as it does not bring it into any disrepute. The power of interference under this article is to be kept to the minimum to ensure that the wheel of justice does not come to a halt and the fountain of justice remains pure and unpolluted in order to maintain public confidence in the functioning of the tribunals and courts Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SINGH KIRMOLIYA W.P.(C) 16642/2023 Page 6 of 7 Signing Date:05.01.2024 20:49:57 subordinate to the High Court. The Apex Court has further held that the exceptional power of judicial intervention is not to be exercised just for grant of relief in individual cases but should be directed for promotion of public confidence in the administration of justice in the larger public interest whereas Article 226 is meant for protection of individual grievance. Therefore, the power under Article 227 may be unfettered but its exercise is subject to high degree of judicial discipline pointed out above and an improper and a frequent exercise of this power will be counterproductive and will divest this extraordinary power of its strength and vitality.
Supreme Court of India Cites 48 - Cited by 2466 - Full Document
1