(a) According to the appellant, the Directorate of Revenue 1500 ofĢ005 whereby the High Court dismissed the petition filed by Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Writ Petition No.
Appellant(s)ġ) This appeal is directed against the final judgment and Taken about 170 m from the main building outside the perimeter wall (Photo credit: Wikipedia)īaby Devassy Chully Bobby …. The doctrine of res judicata or the principles of finality of judgment cannot be allowed to whittle down or override the express constitutional mandate to the Supreme Court enshrined in Article 32 of the Constitution.Įnglish: The supreme court of india. In the instant case, the High Court decided the petition of the detenu under Article 226 which was a discretionary jurisdiction whereas the jurisdiction to grant relief in a petition under Article 32 filed in the Supreme Court is guaranteed by the Constitution and once the court finds that there has been a violation of Article 22(5) of the Constitution, then it has no discretion in the matter but is bound to grant the relief to the detenu by setting aside the order of detention. Such a doctrine would be wholly inapplicable to cases where the two forums have separate and independent jurisdictions. Legal issues The doctrine of finality of judgment or the principles of res judicata are founded on the basic principle that where a Court of competent jurisdiction has decided an issue, the same ought not allowed to be agitated again and again. The doctrine of res judicata or the principles of finality of judgment cannot be allowed to whittle down or override the express constitutional mandate to the Supreme Court enshrined in Article 32 of the Constitution.
The doctrine of finality of judgment or the principles of res judicata are founded on the basic principle that where a Court of competent jurisdiction has decided an issue, the same ought not allowed to be agitated again and again.
0 kommentar(er)
