CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Sailendra Nath Das & Anr. - Appellant
Versus
Saroj Kumar Das & Ors. - Respondent
Decided On : 07-05-1934
Inherent Power - Stay of Proceedings - The court has the inherent power to stay proceedings in a suitable case, even beyond the specific provision under Order 45, Rule 13 of the Code. The court's decision is influenced by the recognition of inherent power and the consideration of expediency and ends of justice.
Fact of the Case:
The court considered the power under Order 45, Rule 13 of the Code to stay further proceedings in the suit and the recognition of inherent power to stay such proceedings in a suitable case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there is abundant inherent power in the court to stay proceedings in a suitable case, as recognized in previous cases. However, the court was not inclined to make an order for stay in this instance, as it did not see irreparable injury resulting from non-interference and found it desirable for the proceedings to continue.
Issues: The issue was whether the court had the power to stay proceedings in a suitable case, beyond the specific provision under Order 45, Rule 13 of the Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that there is abundant inherent power in the court to stay proceedings in a suitable case, and the decision to stay or not is influenced by the expediency and ends of justice in each specific case.
Final Decision: The application for stay was dismissed with costs three gold mohurs.
JUDGMENT
1. As regards the power of this Court Under Order 45, Rule 13 of the Code to stay further proceedings in the suit as distinguished from proceedings in execution, we are not prepared to dissent from the view taken in the case of Laliteswar Singh v. Bhabeswar Singh (1909) 1 IC 812. That decision has been followed in Ram Narain v. Harnam Das 1919 All 14, and though referred to in other cases does not appear to have been ever dissented from. But it is now well settled that apart from the aforesaid provision of the law there is abundant inherent power in this Court to stay such proceedings in a suitable case. One of the latest cases in which such inherent power has been recognised is the case of Sarat Kumar Roy v. Official Assignee Bengal 1931 Cal 79. And indeed from what the Judicial Committee have said on more occasions than one as regards the advisability on the part of this Court to deal with matters of this description, at least in the first instance, it would seem that such power has been assumed. On the merits, however, we are not inclined to take the view that expediency or ends of justice requires any order for stay being made. We are not satisfied that any irreparable injury will result from our non-interference, and on the other hand think that it is desirable from several points of view that such proceedings should be allowed to take their own course. The application is dismissed with costs three gold mohurs.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.