Back
2018 Supreme(SC) 1597
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Rohinton Fali Nariman, Indu Malhotra, JJ.
Jaswant Singh - Appellant
Versus
Punjab Agricultural University - Respondent
Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 24044 of 2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 09-03-2018 in RSA No. 1319 of 2016 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh)
Decided On : 27-08-2018
Mr. K.G. Bhagat, Advocate, Mr. Vineet Bhagat, AOR Ms. Archana Midha, Advocate., for the Petitioner
The remedy under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act is summary in nature and no appeal lies under Section 6(3) of the Act.
Headnote:
Specific Relief Act - Section 6 - Summary nature of remedy under Section 6
Fact of the Case:
Delay condoned. Permission to file Special Leave Petition is granted. Delay in filing substitution application is condoned. Abatement is set aside. Application for substitution is allowed. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
Finding of the Court:
We find no merit in the Special Leave Petition. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. However, it is surprising that in a Section 6 Suit, appeals have solemnly been filed and heard on merits. What is even more surprising is that from the first appeal dismissal, a second appeal is also filed and dismissed. We need to remind the Courts below that Section 6(3) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 shows that the remedy under Section 6 is summary in nature and that no appeal lies.
Issues: Delay in filing substitution application, abatement, nature of remedy under Section 6
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the summary nature of the remedy under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 and highlighted that no appeal lies under Section 6(3) of the Act.
Final Decision: The Special Leave Petition is dismissed.
ORDER
1. Delay condoned.
2. Permission to file Special Leave Petition is granted. Delay in filing substitution application is condoned. Abatement is set aside.
3. Application for substitution is allowed.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
5. We find no merit in the Special Leave Petition.
6. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. However, it is surprising that in a Section 6 Suit, appeals have solemnly been filed and heard on merits. What is even more surprising is that from the first appeal dismissal, a second appeal is also filed and dismissed.
7. We need to remind the Courts below that Section 6(3) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 shows that the remedy under Section 6 is summary in nature and that no appeal lies.
