Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 35 (0.29 seconds)
The Board Of Trustees For The Port Of ... vs M/S. Automobile Association Of Eastern ... on 13 November, 2024 cites

State Of Kerala & Ors vs V.R.Kalliyanikutty & Anr on 1 April, 1999

In such a situation it falls for consideration whether the principle of law enunciated in State of Kerala v. V.R. Kalliyanikutty [State of Kerala v. V.R. Kalliyanikutty, (1999) 3 SCC 657] and in New Delhi Municipal Committee v. Kalu 14 Ram [New Delhi Municipal Committee v. Kalu Ram, (1976) 3 SCC 407] is attracted so as to bar entertainment of claims which are legally not recoverable in a suit or other legal proceeding on account of bar created by the Limitation Act. On behalf of the respondents those judgments were explained by pointing out that in the first case the peculiar words in the statute--"amount due" and in the second case "arrears of rent payable" fell for interpretation in the context of powers of the tribunal concerned and on account of the aforesaid particular words of the statute this Court held that the duty cast upon the authority to determine what is recoverable or payable implies a duty to determine such claims in accordance with law. In our considered view a statutory authority like the Commission is also required to determine or decide a claim or dispute either by itself or by referring it to arbitration only in accordance with law and thus Sections 174 and 175 of the Electricity Act assume relevance. Since no separate limitation has been prescribed for exercise of power under Section 86(1)(f) nor this adjudicatory power of the Commission has been enlarged to entertain even the time-barred claims, there is no conflict between the provisions of the Electricity Act and the Limitation Act to attract the provisions of Section 174 of the Electricity Act. In such a situation, on account of the provisions in Section 175 of the Electricity Act or even otherwise, the power of adjudication and determination or even the power of deciding whether a case requires reference to arbitration must be exercised in a fair manner and in accordance with law. In the absence of any provision in the Electricity Act creating a new right upon a claimant to claim even monies barred by law of limitation, or taking away a right of the other side to take a lawful defence of limitation, we are persuaded to hold that in the light of nature of judicial power conferred on the Commission, claims coming for adjudication before it cannot be entertained or allowed if it is found legally not recoverable in a regular suit or any other regular proceeding such as arbitration, on account of law of limitation. We have taken this view not only because it appears to be more just but also because unlike labour laws and the Industrial Disputes Act, the Electricity Act has no peculiar philosophy or inherent underlying reasons requiring adherence to a contrary view."
Supreme Court of India Cites 29 - Cited by 144 - S V Manohar - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next