Back
SUPREME COURT OF INIDA
WORLD TEL INC.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA
Decided on : October 11, 2000
Refund Claim - Contractual Obligations - The court held that disputes arising from contractual obligations should not be resolved through summary proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution, and directed the parties to pursue resolution in a civil court. The findings made against the appellant in the impugned judgment were vacated, and the appellant was given the right to file a civil suit to establish the claim for refund.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner made a claim for refund of a sum of eighty-three-and-odd lakhs of rupees together with interest at the rate of 21% p. a. payable by doordarshan. The writ petition filed by the petitioner under Article 226 was dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi by entering into the merits of the rival contentions.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court should not have entered upon findings on the contentious issues in a proceeding under article 226 of the Constitution. The parties should have been directed to a civil court for resolution of the hotly disputed issues. The court vacated the findings made against the appellant and disposed of the appeal without prejudice to the right of the appellant for filing a civil suit.
Issues: The appropriateness of resolving disputes arising from contractual obligations through summary proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi: Disputes arising from contractual obligations should not be resolved through summary proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution. Parties should be directed to pursue resolution in a civil court.
Final Decision: The findings made against the appellant in the impugned judgment were vacated, and the appellant was given the right to file a civil suit to establish the claim for refund.
( 1 ) LEAVE granted.
( 2 ) THE petitioner made a claim for refund of a sum of eighty-three-and- odd lakhs of rupees together with interest at the rate of 21% p. a. payable by doordarshan. The writ petition filed by the petitioner under Article 226 was dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi by entering into the merits of the rival contentions. In our view the High Court ought not to have entered upon findings on the contentious issues in a proceeding under article 226 of the Constitution. Instead the parties should have been directed to a civil court so that the hotly disputed issues could have been resolved in a civil litigation. The claim made is basically one arising from contractual obligations. Time and again this Court has said that such disputes should not be resolved through the summary proceedings conducted under Article 226 of the Constitution. We, therefore, vacate all such findings made against the appellant in the impugned judgment.
( 3 ) AT the same time, we do not wish to enter into the controversy as the slp arose from a writ petition filed under Article 226. We dispose of this appeal without prejudice to the right of the appellant for filing a civil suit and obtaining a decree for the money claimed by him, if the same can be established in law.
( 4 ) MR P. Chidambaram, learned Senior Counsel submitted that the respondent is likely to raise the question of limitation if any civil suit is filed and in which case they are entitled to resort to Section 14 of the Limitation act. The appellant can then raise the plea based on Section 14 of the limitation Act. If any resistance is offered by the respondent to such plea, we leave it to the civil court to decide that issue also.
( 5 ) WITH these observations, this appeal is disposed of.
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
