REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

GURDEV KAUR Appellant

V/S

KAKI Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

LUCHMAN V. PUNA [REFERRED TO]
PRATAP CHUNDER V. MOHANDRANATH [REFERRED TO]
RAM GOPAL V. SHAKSHATON [REFERRED TO]
RAMRATAN SHUKUL V. MUSSUMAT NANDU [REFERRED TO]
DURGA CHOWDHARANI V. JAWAHAR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
RUDR PRASAD V. BAIJ NATH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA V. MOHD. KUNHI [REFERRED TO]
MADHAVAN NAIR V. BHASKAR PILLAI [REFERRED TO]
M.RAMAPPA V. M.BOJJAPPA [REFERRED TO]
DEITY PATTABHIRAMASWAMY VS. S HANYMAYYA [REFERRED TO]
BHOLARAM VS. AMEERCHAND [REFERRED TO]
PANCHUGOPALBARUA VS. UMESH CHANDRA GOSWAMI [REFERRED TO]
KSHITISH CHANDRA PURKAIT VS. SANTOSH KUMAR PURKAIT [REFERRED TO]
SHEELCHAND VS. PRAKASH CHAND [REFERRED TO]
DNYANOBABHAURAO SHEMADE VS. MAROTI BHAURAO MARNOR [REFERRED TO]
KANAI LAL GARARI VS. MURARI GANGULY [REFERRED TO]
SANTOSH HAZARI VS. PURUSHOTTAM TIWARI [REFERRED TO]
K RAJ VS. MUTHAMMA [REFERRED TO]
KANTI DEVI VS. POSHI RAM [REFERRED TO]
THIAGARAJAN VS. VENUGOPALASWAMY B KOIL [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS and CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT VS. P SHANMUGAMA [REFERRED TO]
H P PYAREJAN VS. DASAPPA [REFERRED TO]
HARJEET SINGH VS. AMRIK SINGH [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Judges must administer law according to the provisions of law. It is the bounden duty of judges to discern legislative intention in the process of adjudication. Justice administered according to individual's whim, desire, inclination and notion of justice would lead to confusion, disorder and chaos. Indiscriminate and frequent interference u/s. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure in cases which are totally devoid of any substantial question of law is not only against the legislative intention but is also the main cause of huge pendency of second appeals in the High Courts leading to colossal delay in the administration of justice in civil cases in our country.

(3.) Despite declaration of law in numerous judgments, it is evident that the scope and ambit of Sec. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure has not been properly appreciated and applied in a large number of cases. We are, once again making a serious endeavour to discern legislative intention, ambit and scope of interference u/s. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. We plan to carry out this exercise by critically examining important judgments decided before and after 1976 amendment in the Sec. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This effort is made with the hope that in future the High Courts would decide according to the scope of Sec. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure and this Court may not be compelled to interfere with the judgments delivered u/s. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Brief factual background

Click here to view full judgment.

GURDEV KAUR Vs. KAKI

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address