Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.32 seconds)
Vina Arvindlal Siswawala And 2 Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra And 2 Ors on 24 November, 2018 cites

The State Of Uttar Pradesh vs Mohammad Nooh on 30 September, 1957

12. The Constitution Benches of this Court in K.S. Rashid and Sons vs. Income Tax Investigation Commission, AIR 1954 SC 207; Sangram Singh vs. Election Tribunal, Kotah, AIR 1955 SC 425; Union of India vs. T.R. Varma, AIR 1957 SC 882; State of U.P. vs. Mohd. Nooh, AIR 1958 SC 86 and K.S. Venkataraman and Co. (P) Ltd. vs. State of Madras, AIR 1966 SC 1089 have held that though Article 226 confers a very wide powers in the matter of issuing writs on the High Court, the remedy of writ absolutely discretionary in character. If the High Court is satisfied 4 (2014) 1 Supreme Court Cases 603 Sneha Chavan 27/29 ::: Uploaded on - 24/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 26/11/2018 01:34:19 ::: wp 1346-15.doc that the aggrieved party can have an adequate or suitable relief elsewhere, it can refuse to exercise its jurisdiction. The Court, in extraordinary circumstances, may exercise the power if it comes to the conclusion that there has been a breach of principles of natural justice or procedure required for decision has not been adopted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 27 - Cited by 1128 - Full Document

K.S. Rashid And Son vs The Income-Tax Investigation ... on 22 January, 1954

12. The Constitution Benches of this Court in K.S. Rashid and Sons vs. Income Tax Investigation Commission, AIR 1954 SC 207; Sangram Singh vs. Election Tribunal, Kotah, AIR 1955 SC 425; Union of India vs. T.R. Varma, AIR 1957 SC 882; State of U.P. vs. Mohd. Nooh, AIR 1958 SC 86 and K.S. Venkataraman and Co. (P) Ltd. vs. State of Madras, AIR 1966 SC 1089 have held that though Article 226 confers a very wide powers in the matter of issuing writs on the High Court, the remedy of writ absolutely discretionary in character. If the High Court is satisfied 4 (2014) 1 Supreme Court Cases 603 Sneha Chavan 27/29 ::: Uploaded on - 24/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 26/11/2018 01:34:19 ::: wp 1346-15.doc that the aggrieved party can have an adequate or suitable relief elsewhere, it can refuse to exercise its jurisdiction. The Court, in extraordinary circumstances, may exercise the power if it comes to the conclusion that there has been a breach of principles of natural justice or procedure required for decision has not been adopted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 555 - B K Mukherjea - Full Document

Sangram Singh vs Election Tribunal, Kotah,Bhurey Lal ... on 22 March, 1955

12. The Constitution Benches of this Court in K.S. Rashid and Sons vs. Income Tax Investigation Commission, AIR 1954 SC 207; Sangram Singh vs. Election Tribunal, Kotah, AIR 1955 SC 425; Union of India vs. T.R. Varma, AIR 1957 SC 882; State of U.P. vs. Mohd. Nooh, AIR 1958 SC 86 and K.S. Venkataraman and Co. (P) Ltd. vs. State of Madras, AIR 1966 SC 1089 have held that though Article 226 confers a very wide powers in the matter of issuing writs on the High Court, the remedy of writ absolutely discretionary in character. If the High Court is satisfied 4 (2014) 1 Supreme Court Cases 603 Sneha Chavan 27/29 ::: Uploaded on - 24/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 26/11/2018 01:34:19 ::: wp 1346-15.doc that the aggrieved party can have an adequate or suitable relief elsewhere, it can refuse to exercise its jurisdiction. The Court, in extraordinary circumstances, may exercise the power if it comes to the conclusion that there has been a breach of principles of natural justice or procedure required for decision has not been adopted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 1118 - V Bose - Full Document

Union Of India vs T. R. Varma on 18 September, 1957

12. The Constitution Benches of this Court in K.S. Rashid and Sons vs. Income Tax Investigation Commission, AIR 1954 SC 207; Sangram Singh vs. Election Tribunal, Kotah, AIR 1955 SC 425; Union of India vs. T.R. Varma, AIR 1957 SC 882; State of U.P. vs. Mohd. Nooh, AIR 1958 SC 86 and K.S. Venkataraman and Co. (P) Ltd. vs. State of Madras, AIR 1966 SC 1089 have held that though Article 226 confers a very wide powers in the matter of issuing writs on the High Court, the remedy of writ absolutely discretionary in character. If the High Court is satisfied 4 (2014) 1 Supreme Court Cases 603 Sneha Chavan 27/29 ::: Uploaded on - 24/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 26/11/2018 01:34:19 ::: wp 1346-15.doc that the aggrieved party can have an adequate or suitable relief elsewhere, it can refuse to exercise its jurisdiction. The Court, in extraordinary circumstances, may exercise the power if it comes to the conclusion that there has been a breach of principles of natural justice or procedure required for decision has not been adopted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 786 - Full Document

K.S. Venkataraman And Co. (P.), Ltd. vs State Of Madras on 22 March, 1966

12. The Constitution Benches of this Court in K.S. Rashid and Sons vs. Income Tax Investigation Commission, AIR 1954 SC 207; Sangram Singh vs. Election Tribunal, Kotah, AIR 1955 SC 425; Union of India vs. T.R. Varma, AIR 1957 SC 882; State of U.P. vs. Mohd. Nooh, AIR 1958 SC 86 and K.S. Venkataraman and Co. (P) Ltd. vs. State of Madras, AIR 1966 SC 1089 have held that though Article 226 confers a very wide powers in the matter of issuing writs on the High Court, the remedy of writ absolutely discretionary in character. If the High Court is satisfied 4 (2014) 1 Supreme Court Cases 603 Sneha Chavan 27/29 ::: Uploaded on - 24/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 26/11/2018 01:34:19 ::: wp 1346-15.doc that the aggrieved party can have an adequate or suitable relief elsewhere, it can refuse to exercise its jurisdiction. The Court, in extraordinary circumstances, may exercise the power if it comes to the conclusion that there has been a breach of principles of natural justice or procedure required for decision has not been adopted.
Madras High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 354 - P S Kailasam - Full Document

Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd vs State Of Orissa on 13 April, 1983

15. Thus, while it can be said that this Court has recognized some exceptions to the rule of alternative remedy, i.e., where the statutory authority has not acted in accordance with the provisions of the enactment in question, or in defiance of the fundamental principles of judicial procedure, or has resorted to invoke the provisions which are repealed, or when an order has been passed in total violation of the principles of natural justice, the proposition laid down in Thansingh Nathmal case, Titagarh Paper Mills case and other similar judgments that the High Court will not entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution if an effective alternative remedy is available to the aggrieved person or the statute under which the action complained of has been taken itself contains a mechanism for redressal of grievance still holds the field. Therefore, when a statutory forum is created by law for redressal of grievances, a writ petition should not be entertained ignoring the statutory dispensation."
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 897 - A P Sen - Full Document
1   2 Next