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

1985 Supreme(Mad) 354

NAINAR SUNDARAM
V. Savarimuthu – Appellant
Versus
Spl. Director of Enforcement, and Another – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:R. Subramaniam, R. Asha Latha, S. Radhika, Advocates.

Judgment :-

The matter comes up for orders regarding maintainability. Against the order impugned in this revision under Art.227 of the Constitution, the petitioner has the remedy of and ought to have resorted to a regular appeal before the Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board under S.52, Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (46 of 1973), hereinafter referred to as the'Act'. He has not done so. On the ground that the impugned order ignores the policy of the Government and certain instructions issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the petitioner wants to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Art.227 of the Constitution.

2. The power under Art.227 is an extraordinary power, and it requires to be exercised sparingly and with extreme caution. It is a power of superintendence reserved for this Court and is subject to its discretion and it cannot be claimed as of right by any party. By now, it has been settled by pronouncements of the highest Court in the land as to when this Court could properly resort. to and exercise the powers under Art.227. The well accepted contingencies and features to warrant the exercise of such powers are

(i) lack of jurisdiction, erro




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