Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.34 seconds)Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Rajendra Singh & Ors on 14 March, 2000
In United India
Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Rajendra Singh and ors. (supra) this
Court had held thus:
Section 151 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 4 in The Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 [Entire Act]
Section 28 in The Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 [Entire Act]
Section 29 in The Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 [Entire Act]
The Employee's Compensation Act, 1923
State Of U.P. vs District Judge, Unnao And Ors. on 6 December, 1983
We are greatly disturbed by the insensitivity
reflected in the impugned judgment rendered by the learned
single Judge in a case where judicial mind would be tempted
to utilize all possible legal measures to impart justice to
a man mutilated so outrageously by his cruel destiny. The
High Court non-suited him in exercise of a supervisory and
extraordinary jurisdiction envisaged under Article 227 of
the Constitution. Time and again this Court has reminded
that the power conferred on the High Court under Article
226 and 227 of the Constitution is to advance justice and
not to thwart it. {vide State of Uttar Pradesh vs. District
Judge, Unnao and ors. (AIR 1984 SC 1401)}. The very purpose
of such constitutional powers being conferred on the High
Courts is that no man should be subjected to injustice by
violating the law. The look out of the High Court is,
therefore, not merely to pick out any error of law through
an academic angle but to see whether injustice has resulted
on account of any erroneous interpretation of law. If
justice became the byproduct of an erroneous view of law
the High Court is not expected to erase such justice in the
name of correcting the error of law.
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
1