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

2013 Supreme(SC) 1126

ANIL R.DAVE, DIPAK MISRA
Arasmeta Captive Power Company Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Lafarge India Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent


Dipak Misra, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. In Government of Andra Pradesh and others v. A. P. Jaiswal and others, AIR 2001 SC 499 a three-Judge Bench has observed thus:- "Consistency is the cornerstone of the administration of justice. It is consistency which creates confidence in the system and this consistency can never be achieved without respect to the rule of finality. It is with a view to achieve consistency in judicial pronouncements, the Courts have evolved the rule of precedents, principle of stare decisis etc. These rules and principle are based on public policy..."

3. We have commenced our opinion with the aforesaid exposition of law as arguments have been canvassed by Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned senior counsel for the appellants, with innovative intellectual animation how a three-Judge Bench in Chloro Controls India Private Limited v. Seven Trent Water Purification Inc. and others, (2013) 1 SCC 641 has inappositely and incorrectly understood the principles stated in the major part of the decision rendered by a larger Bench in SBP & Company v. Patel Engineering Ltd. and another, (2005) 8 SCC 618 and, in resistance, Mr. Harish Salve and Dr. A.M. Singhvi, learned senior counsel for t











































































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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top