Supreme Court of India: Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC on a Time-Barred Petition
IN THE MATTER OF:
Shakti Bhog Food Industries Ltd. …Appellant(s)
Versus
The Central Bank of India & Anr. …Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 2515 OF 2020
JUNE 05, 2020: The plaint came to be rejected by the trial Court under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the CPC on the ground that it was barred by law of limitation, as it was filed beyond the period of three years prescribed in Article 113 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (for short, “the 1963 Act”), as applicable to the present case, from the date when the right to sue accrued to the appellant in October 2000. Be it noted that the appellant had relied on Articles 2, 3 and 22 of the 1963 Act to urge that the suit filed in February 2005 was within limitation. This plea, however, did not impress the trial Court, the first appellate Court or the High Court. The 1 (2013) 198 DLT 56 Courts proceeded on the basis that Article 113 is attracted in the facts of the present case, as the reliefs claimed by the appellant were not covered under any specific Article with regard to the time period within which accounts can be sought by a party from its bank, as noted by the trial Court in paragraph 10 of its judgment reproduced above.
READ MORE
Supreme Court: Judgment on Issue of Employers Associations questioning the Orders issued under the Disaster Management Act issued that all the employers shall make payment of wages of their workers for the period during the lockdown.
FICUS PAX PRIVATE LTD. & ORS. … PETITIONERS
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. … RESPONDENTS
Writ Petition (C) Diary No. 10983 of 2020
JUNE 12, 2020: All these writ petitions except one(i.e. W.P.(civil) Diary No.10981/2020) have been filed by different employers, employers’ associations questioning the orders issued under Disaster Management Act, 2005 and other consequential orders issued by different States where directions have been issued that all the employers be it in the industries or in the shops, commercial establishment, shall make payment of wages of their workers, at their workplace, on the due date, without any deduction, for the period their establishments are under closure during the lockdown.
We thus direct following interim measures which can be availed by all the private establishment, industries, factories and workers Trade Unions/ Employees Associations etc. which may be facilitated by the State Authorities: –
(i) The private establishment, industries, employers who are willing to enter into negotiation and settlement with the workers/employees regarding payment of wages for 50 days or for any other period as applicable in any particular State during which their industrial establishment was closed down due to lockdown, may initiate a process of negotiation with their employee’s organization and enter into a settlement with them and if they are unable to settle by themselves submit a request to concerned labour authorities who are entrusted with the obligation under the different statute to conciliate the dispute between the parties who on receiving such request, may call the concerned Employees Trade Union/workers Association/ workers to appear on a date for negotiation, conciliation and settlement. In the event a settlement is arrived at, that may be acted upon by the employers and workers irrespective of the order dated 29.03.2020 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs.
(ii) Those employers’ establishments, industries, factories which were working during the lockdown period although not to their capacity can also take steps as indicated in direction No.(i).
(iii) The private establishments, industries, factories shall permit the workers/employees to work in their establishment who are willing to work which may be without prejudice to rights of the workers/employees regarding unpaid wages of above 50 days. The private establishments, factories who proceed to take steps as per directions (i) and (ii) shall publicise and communicate about their such steps to workers and employees for their response/participation. The settlement, if any, as indicated above shall be without prejudice to the rights of employers and employees which is pending adjudication in these writ petitions.
(iv) The Central Government, all the States/UTs through their Ministry of Labour shall circulate and publicise this order for the benefit of all private establishment, employers, factories and workers/employees.
READ MORE
Supreme Court: Suo Moto Writ Petition for the Proper Treatment of the COVID 19 Patients and Dignified Handling of the Dead Bodies in the Hospitals ETC.
JUNE 19, 2020: Supreme Court issued a notice on 12.06.2020 in this Suo Motu writ petition with the object to notice deficiencies, shortcomings and lapses inpatient care of Covid-19 in different hospitals in National Capital Territory of Delhi and other States. The object was to take remedial action by all concerned to redeem the plight of patients and other persons who need medical care.
READ MORE
Supreme Court: Standard Operating Procedure for Ld. Advocate/Party-in-person for e-Filing, Mentioning, Listing and Video Conferencing Hearing
JULY O4, 2020: The present circular is being issued in supersession of the procedures regarding e-filing, mentioning, listing etc. prescribed under the previous circulars dated 23rd March 2020, 15th April 2020 and 16th May 2020 reiterating and further elaborating Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for e-filing, mentioning, listing and hearing of matters through video conferencing/teleconferencing mode.
READ MORE
Procedure for Physical Filing of the Matters In The High Court of Judicature at Mumbai Principal Seat
JUNE 24, 2020: Physical (i.e. paper-based) filings of all categories of Appellate and Original Side matters will be accepted with effect from 25th June 2020. A special filing counter has been set up in Court Room No 6 on the ground floor. This is to avoid crowding in the regular registry. This is a temporary facility during the Covid19 pandemic period. The regulations/restrictions need to be strictly observed.
READ MORE
Allahabad High Court: The parameters for invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 against an authority/person residing outside the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court by holding that cause of action wholly or in part arose within the territorial jurisdiction of High Court.
Petitioner :- Manish Kumar Mishra
Respondent :- Union of India and 4 others
Petitioner :- Amarjeet Yadav
Respondent :- Union of India and 4 others
Petitioner :- Rabesh Singh
Respondent :- Union of India and 4 others
Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar
Respondent :- Union of India and 4 others
Petitioner :- Jitendra Kumar Nagar
Respondent :- Union of India through Secretary Department of Home Affairs and others
Appellant :- Chandra Pal Singh
Respondent :- Union of India and 3 others
Appellant :- Sikandar Yadav
Respondent :- Union of India and 4 others
The judgment pronounced by:
Hon’ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.
Hon’ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
Hon’ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
The meaning of the expression “cause of action”, in the context of the territorial jurisdiction of a High Court under Article 226(2), was considered in State of Rajasthan and others Vs. M/s Swaika Properties and another48, and it was observed that in order to invest the High Court with jurisdiction to entertain the petition the transaction in question must be an integral part of the cause of action. In the facts of the case, it was held that the service of notice on the respondent at its registered office at Calcutta within the territorial limits of the State of West Bengal, in respect of acquisition proceedings initiated by Rajasthan State Government regarding land situate in Jaipur, could not give rise to a cause of action within the territorial jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court unless the service of such notice was an integral part of the cause of action.
READ JUDGMENT
The facility of Video Conferencing at Allahabad High Court Arbitration Centre
JULY 04, 2020 NOTICE
READ MORE
Allahabad High Court: Hearing of all matters by Video Conferencing
JULY 04, 2020 Notice
READ MORE
Samadhan at Delhi High Court: Online Mediation Project
JUNE 26, 2020: On-Line Mediation Project at Samadhan, duly approved by Hon’ble the Chief Justice, for holding mediation session through video conferencing till such time the regular functioning of the Centre is resumed.
Add Comment