SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1980 Supreme(SC) 338

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SOHAN LAL
versus
ASHA RAM
Decide on August 5, 1980

Changed circumstances, such as the dissolution of the Legislative Assembly and fresh elections, can render a litigation unreal and not worthy of consideration by the court.

Headnote:

Election Appeal - Dissolution of Legislative Assembly - The court declined to adjudicate the issue raised by the appellant due to the dissolution of the U.P. Legislative Assembly and the subsequent fresh elections, rendering the litigation unreal and a waste of the court's time.

Fact of the Case:

The U.P. Legislative Assembly has been dissolved, fresh elections have taken place, and a fresh House with newly elected representatives has come into existence. The court declined to investigate the issue raised by the appellant due to the changed circumstances.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the subsequent events, including the dissolution of the Legislative Assembly and fresh elections, rendered the litigation unreal and not worthy of consideration, leading to the disposal of the appeal without adjudication.

Issues: The main issue was the appellant's challenge, which became irrelevant due to the changed circumstances of the dissolution of the Legislative Assembly and fresh elections.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the changed circumstances, leading to the conclusion that the litigation was unreal and a waste of the court's time.

Final Decision: The appeal was disposed of without adjudication, and the same fate was shared by the cross-appeal, with parties bearing their own costs.

Judgment

Krishna lyer, J.

( 1 ) THIS election appeal would have invited adjudicatoin of the issue raised by the appllant bul for the fact that the U. P. Legislasive assembly has since been dissolved, fresh elections having taken place and a fresh House having come into existence with newly elected representatives. Perhaps Shri Lekhis client has a substantial grievance. It is also possible that the decision of the court below was wrong but we are not inclined to investigate the question at all and, therefore, do not propose to hear either shri Lekhi or Shri Yogeshwar Prasad. The subsequent events we have adverted to have rendered this litigation so wholly unreal that it will be a waste of this courts time to consider the issues. For this reason we dispose of this appeal without adjudication. The same fate will be shared by the cross appeal. Partics will bear their own costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top