Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

Inside Court News

Supreme Court : Should a Judgement Be Reconsidered As It Adopted a Previously Overruled Precedent?

Issue – The fact that a Division Bench of the Supreme Court reached a judgement on a legal issue and that decision was later overturned or amended by a higher court in another case does not justify the reconsideration of that decision.

Facts of the case – In Pune Municipal Corporation v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki, a saving provision in the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act of 2013 was constructed. Pune Municipal Corporation and all other judgements that had relied on it were overturned by a Constitution Bench in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal.

The review petitioners have stated that the Indore Development Authority specifically overturned the Pune Municipal Corporation and all other decisions that came after it. They want that the ruling be overturned and that the SLPs and civil appeals be reinstated. The petitions for review were unmaintainable, according to the replies.

Arguments – Each civil matter is subject to review on the reasons set out in Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC, according to Order XLVII of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, Rule 1. 

It is not a valid reason to reconsider a judgement just because a superior Court later overturned it in another instance.

Reasoning – In this instance, the review petitioner has asked for a review on the justification of “any other adequate cause”. The phrase, nevertheless, is not specified in CPC. The judge made this observation after citing three decisions and said that “other adequate cause” had to be comparable to the other two grounds listed in the clause.

Judgement – A judgement would be binding on the parties even if it were later shown to be incorrect and overturned.

Provisions used in the case – Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement, 2013, Section 24(2), Rule 1 of Order XLVII of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

Case title – Govt. of NCT of Delhi Through the Secretary, Land and Building Department And Anr. v. M/s. K.L. Rathi Steels Limited And Ors.

Written By – Nikita Shankar

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Related Posts

How To Write #CaseSummary Of A #Judgement?