Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Continuous Cause of Action from Seal on a Commercial Establishment - The courts have recognized that sealing or putting a lock on a commercial establishment can give rise to a continuous and recurring cause of action, especially if the sealing is due to illegal or unauthorized activity. Each act of sealing or re-sealing, often related to unauthorized use or illegal construction, constitutes a fresh cause of action, enabling authorities or aggrieved parties to initiate subsequent legal proceedings. This principle is evident in cases where authorities seal premises for violations such as illegal construction or unauthorized commercial use, and courts have upheld that such actions create ongoing causes of action until the premises are restored or legal violations are rectified ["Supreme Industries Limited VS Ankit Goel Trading As Goel Trading Company - Delhi"], ["Sai Gange Narmade Seeds Private Limited VS Indore Municipal Corporation Commissioner - Madhya Pradesh"].
Seal on Property as a Legal Remedy - The act of sealing or locking premises, especially in cases of illegal construction or unauthorized commercial activity, is considered a legal measure to prevent further violations and is supported by statutory provisions. However, such actions must adhere to principles of natural justice, including giving notice and a fair opportunity to be heard. Courts have held that sealing without prior notice or personal hearing can be challenged as illegal, but when done lawfully, it remains a valid enforcement measure until the violation is addressed ["Sai Gange Narmade Seeds Private Limited VS Indore Municipal Corporation Commissioner - Madhya Pradesh"], ["Rajinder Rai vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi - Delhi"].
Effect of Sealing on Cause of Action - The sealing of premises related to commercial activity or illegal construction creates a cause of action that persists until the violation is remedied. Each subsequent act of sealing or enforcement action can be treated as a fresh cause of action, especially if violations continue or new violations are discovered. This ongoing nature of cause of action justifies the authorities' continued enforcement actions and the right of parties to seek legal redress ["Supreme Industries Limited VS Ankit Goel Trading As Goel Trading Company - Delhi"], ["KODANDAM VS SPECIAL OFFICER, THE WANAPARTHY CO-OP. MARKETING SOCIETY Ltd. - Andhra Pradesh"].
Jurisdiction and Enforcement Actions - The cause of action arising from sealing or enforcement actions also determines jurisdiction. Courts have emphasized that jurisdiction is linked to where the cause of action arises, and ongoing violations or enforcement measures at a particular location confer jurisdiction to local courts or tribunals. This is relevant in cases involving sealing for unauthorized commercial use or illegal construction, where authorities act within their territorial jurisdiction ["The Laxmi Vishnu Textile Mills Ltd. , Bombay VS M. R. Balakrishnan - Madras"], ["S. Sasikumar VS Government of Tamil Nadu - Madras"].
Conclusion - In summary, a seal placed on a commercial establishment or premises for violations such as illegal construction, unauthorized use, or other infractions results in a continuous cause of action. Each enforcement or sealing act related to ongoing violations sustains or renews this cause of action, enabling authorities and parties to pursue legal remedies until compliance or rectification occurs. The legal validity of such sealing depends on adherence to procedural fairness, but once lawfully executed, it establishes a continuing basis for legal proceedings until the violation is resolved ["Supreme Industries Limited VS Ankit Goel Trading As Goel Trading Company - Delhi"], ["Sai Gange Narmade Seeds Private Limited VS Indore Municipal Corporation Commissioner - Madhya Pradesh"], ["KODANDAM VS SPECIAL OFFICER, THE WANAPARTHY CO-OP. MARKETING SOCIETY Ltd. - Andhra Pradesh"].
Imagine discovering a seal plastered on your business premises, halting operations overnight. As a property owner or commercial tenant, you might wonder: does this seal put on a commercial establishment give a continuous cause of action? This question arises frequently in disputes involving municipal authorities, building regulations, or intellectual property issues. In this post, we dive into the legal nuances, drawing from key judgments to clarify when sealing triggers ongoing legal recourse and when it doesn't.
While sealing feels like an immediate injustice, courts generally view it as a remedial step rather than an independent trigger for continuous claims. Let's break it down step by step.
The legal documents collectively establish that a seal placed on a commercial establishment generally does not, by itself, create a continuous cause of action. Instead, the cause of action arises from the underlying violation or misconduct that prompted the sealing—such as misuse of premises or unauthorized changes in use. If those violations persist or recur, the cause of action may be considered ongoing, allowing multiple legal actions over time. The sealing itself is typically a procedural or remedial measure. CLASSIC MOTORS LIMITED VS MARUTI UDYOG LIMITED - 1996 0 Supreme(Del) 973
This distinction is crucial. Sealing stops the activity but doesn't perpetually renew your right to sue unless violations continue.
Sealing often follows administrative or judicial orders to curb violations like unauthorized construction or commercial misuse in residential zones. For instance, under acts like the Jammu and Kashmir Control of Building Operations Act, authorities issue show-cause notices before sealing:
The respondent-Authority was directed to issue fresh show cause notices within two weeks' time to the owners of the buildings as well as to the persons running the commercial activities, and to take appropriate action in terms of sections 7 & 8 of the Act afresh after hearing/providing an opportunity of being heard to them... Meenakshi Chouhan VS Jammu Municipal Corporation - 2022 0 Supreme(J&K) 307
Here, sealing addresses the violation, not creating a new one. Similarly, Delhi Municipal Corporation cases stress that sealing residential premises without proven misuse is impermissible—linking it directly to breaches of law. Shabeer Khan VS Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation - 2021 0 Supreme(Telangana) 430
Courts recognize continuous or recurring causes of action in cases of persistent wrongs. Trademark infringement provides a clear analogy:
In cases of continuous causes of action or recurring causes of action bar of Order 2 Rule 2 sub-rule (3) cannot be invoked. Bengal Waterproof LTD. VS Bombay Waterproof Manufacturing Company - 1997 6 Supreme 139
Each act of infringement post a prior suit forms a fresh cause:
The grievance regarding passing off of the defendants goods as if they were plaintiff’s goods was also confined to the situation prevailing on the date of the earlier suit... In the second suit, the grievance is not based on acts of infringement or passing off in 1980 but on continuous acts subsequent to that date. Bengal Waterproof LTD. VS Bombay Waterproof Manufacturing Company - 1997 6 Supreme 139
Applying this to premises: If a business continues unauthorized operations despite sealing (e.g., by breaking the seal), each instance could be a new violation. But the seal alone? No. CLASSIC MOTORS LIMITED VS MARUTI UDYOG LIMITED - 1996 0 Supreme(Del) 973
Other contexts reinforce this. Suspension of an employee, for example, creates a continuous cause of action because suspension affects an employee each day it continues; the injury itself continues from day to day. Municipal Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai VS Gunaji Suryaji Kamble - 2020 Supreme(Bom) 468 Encroachment on common areas similarly qualifies as ongoing if it persists, with fresh limitation periods each time. Lata Tyagi VS Registrar Co-operative Society - 2017 Supreme(Del) 3317
Conversely, isolated past irregularities (e.g., financial lapses in specific years) don't extend into continuous claims. Enamul Haque S/o Late Ekramul Haque VS State of Jharkhand through its Chief Secretary - 2019 Supreme(Jhk) 281
Shops and Establishments Acts highlight sealing in regulatory enforcement. In Andhra Pradesh cases, commercial establishments face sealing for non-compliance, but disputes center on service conditions or gratuity, not sealing as a perpetual claim. V. GOPALAKRISHNAIAH VS DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK, KAKINADA - 1998 Supreme(AP) 638Grand Kakatiya Sheraton Hotel & Towers Employees & Workers Union VS Srinivasa Resorts Ltd. - 2009 Supreme(SC) 397 Unauthorized constructions prompt lock-and-seal notices, yet action targets the breach, not the seal. M.Udaya vs The Principal Secretary to G - 2023 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 690
Bank demands for dues can form continuous causes if claims accrue periodically through interest, but again, it's the underlying debt, not a one-off action. Kesoram Industries Limited VS Allahabad Bank - 2017 Supreme(Cal) 137
While flexible, the law has boundaries:- No ongoing violations? No continuous claim: A resolved seal without recurrence ends the matter. Jaghbir Singh VS P. K. Tripathi, Chief Secy. , Govt. of NCT of Delhi - 2017 6 Supreme 298- Sealing without basis: If improperly applied, challenge it promptly, but it doesn't auto-generate endless actions. CLASSIC MOTORS LIMITED VS MARUTI UDYOG LIMITED - 1996 0 Supreme(Del) 973- Statute-specific rules: Continuous industry classifications or labor welfare exclusions don't alter the principle—focus remains on the wrong. Seth Bankatlal Maloo (S. B. M. ) Industries Pvt. Ltd. VS Superintendent Engineer (NRC) - 2010 Supreme(Bom) 612Food Corporation of India, rep. by The District Manager (Storage), Cochin VS State of Kerala, rep. by The Chief Secretary To Govt. , Trivandrum - 2015 Supreme(Ker) 109
Facing a seal? Here's how to navigate:- Document violations: Authorities must prove ongoing misuse for repeated actions. Each clear breach supports separate proceedings.- Seek relief strategically: Challenge the seal via writs if procedural lapses exist, but build cases on persistent issues for successive suits.- Prevent recurrence: Comply swiftly to avoid escalating to continuous claims against you.- Consult experts: Statutes like municipal acts or IP laws vary by jurisdiction.
In summary, sealing a commercial establishment does not, by itself, create a continuous cause of action. Claims stem from underlying, ongoing violations like misuse or infringement, enabling multiple actions if they recur. Bengal Waterproof LTD. VS Bombay Waterproof Manufacturing Company - 1997 6 Supreme 139CLASSIC MOTORS LIMITED VS MARUTI UDYOG LIMITED - 1996 0 Supreme(Del) 973
Key Takeaways:- Sealing is remedial, not generative of claims.- Persistent wrongs renew limitation clocks.- Tailor legal strategy to proven, recurring breaches.
This post provides general insights based on reviewed judgments and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your specific situation.
trade mark which gives rise to a recurring and fresh cause of action each time. ... Any new infringement, which is committed by the guilty party, gives rise to a continuous and fresh cause of action in favour of the party aggrieved, which has every right to file a fresh suit in order to seek redressal of its grievances. 24. ... The cause of action for filing this present second suit is the continuous and recurring ....
Section 47 (3) of the Act, 1988 reads as follows : (3) Every employee who has put in a continuous service of not less than one year shall be eligible for service compensation amounting to fifteen days average wages for each year of continuous employment, (i) on voluntary cessation of his work after completion ... According to the learned Counsel for the petitioners that Section 2 (5} of the Act, 1988 defines the commercial Establishment , which reads as follows: (5) commercial #HL_ST....
It is further submitted that inspite of the order of this court directing CMDA to take action and the impugned lock and seal notice issued on 08.12.2022, the authorities are postponing the enforcement action. ... The 2 respondent-CMDA is directed to take enforcement action as against the unauthorised portions put up in the subject property. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. ... As per the other flat owners viz., impleaded respondents, the builder and the land owner in c....
Now, the Act does not deal with the cause of action, nor does it indicate what factors will confer jurisdiction upon the Labour Court. ... We would add that there is sufficient nexus between the cause of action and jurisdiction and once it is made out that a cause of action in a particular lis or dispute has arisen substantially within the territorial jurisdiction of a statutory functionary Tribunal or Court, then such Tribunal or Court ... Stephens (Madras) 50-I.F.J.R. 217 wherein the....
According to the petitioner, on 23.8.2022 respondent No.2, without issuing any show-cause notice suddenly came to the business premises running in the temporary tin shed and put a lock and seal on the property which resulted in closing down the entire business activities. ... No show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner who is actually in possession and running its business, therefore, the impugned action is illegal and the respondents be directed to unlock the premises. 5. ... The petitioner has....
The respondents nowhere stated that from 1995 till 2006 they have not treated industry of the petitioner as continuous industry. The reason of “mistake” put forth by the respondents is not available till 01.10.2006. ... Circular Nos. 45 & 47 both recognize establishment of the petitioner receiving continuous power supply as continuous industry are, therefore, not appropriately evaluated. The Circulars nowhere contemplated that establishment of the petitioner must be connected on expres....
other establishment as the Government may, by notifications, declare to be a commercial establishment for the purpose of this Act but does not include a shop". ... the Matketing Co-operative Society undoubtedly carries on trade or business and is a commercial establishment within the meaning of Section 2 (S) of the 1966 Act. ... undertaking or which is a commercial or trading or banking or insurance establishment and includes an establishment under ....
establishment within the meaning of clause (4) or any shop within the meaning of clause 15 of Section 2 of the Kerala Shop and Commercial Establishment Act, 1960 (34 of 1960), which employs or on any working day during the preceding twelve months employed, two or more person: ... ( ... It is well settled that show cause notice can be challenged in a proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the ground that the show cause notice is without jurisdiction. ... ... iii) to issue a writ o....
Thus each of the petitioners have put in more than one year's of continuous service. ... Before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, the respondents No.1 and 2 agreed to take back those monthly rated casual labour who had put in continuous service of 800 days and for the rest who have rendered less than 800 days of continuous service and more than one year's service were offered work on daily ... Section 25-F of the Act provides that no workman employed in any industry who has been in continuous....
Section 2 gives definitions in the Act. ... to be a commercial establishment for the purposes of this Act but does not include a shop. ... ... 2(5): `Commercial establishment means an establishment which carries on any trade business, profession or any work in connection with or incidental or ancillary to any such trade business or profession or which is a commercial or trading or banking or insurance establishment and ... As if this is not sufficie....
A cause of action is bundle of facts which put together gives raise to the suit. The Court has to read the entire plaint in order to appreciate if the same discloses a cause of action and if it does the plaint cannot be rejected merely on the opinion of the Court that the plaintiff may not ultimately succeed in the suit. So long as cause of action has been averred and pleaded the plaint cannot be rejected at the threshold. In the instant application, the applicant has invoked the provisions of Order VII Rule 11 (a) of the Code.
Suspension affects an employee each day it continues; the injury itself continues from day to day; the cause of action which it gives rise to is a continuous cause of action. There is, accordingly, no infirmity in the assessment of the Industrial Court on the issue of limitation.
Continuance of enquiry does not save the State’s power to initiate proceeding against a pensioner beyond the timeframe prescribed in proviso (a)(i) of Rule 43 (b) of the 1950 Rules. The irregularities alleged related to two specific financial years. These irregularities could not be said to have had running impact similar to a situation which gives rise to a continuous cause of action in a judicial proceeding. This being the position of law, we are unable to concur with the opinion of the learned First Court saving the proceeding and confirming the penalty.
The core character of a continuous cause of action is the continuing source of injury which makes the person committing that injury, liable for its continuance. When a bundle of facts that constitute a cause of action keep repeating on a continuous basis, then the cause of action is said to go on de die in Diem, that is to say that it continues from day to day and becomes a 'continuous cause of action'. In other words, if the actions of a person causing injury or wrong are repeated, then the cause of action would be treated as continuous for suing such a person and would ac....
Each demand made by the defendant constitutes a fresh cause of action and/or a continuous cause of action, and the suit is based on this continuous cause of action because the defendant bank has continually made claims that there was a debit balance. In this case, the claim of the defendant bank has similarly increased over a passage of time and the defendant has never ceased to make a demand of its alleged dues.
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
