Municipal Comittee Katra vs Ashwani Kumar 2024 INSC 398 – Writ Jurisdiction

Constitution of India, 1950; Article 226 – Disputes arising out of purely contractual obligations cannot be entertained by the High Court in exercise of the extra ordinary writ jurisdiction. In the case of Union of India and Ors. v. Puna Hinda (2021) 10 SCC 690 – In this case, the relief which was sought by the writ petition was purely by way of damagessuch relief could have been subject matter of extra ordinary writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The quantification of the damages would require entering into disputed questions of facts and hence, the High Court ought to have relegated the writ petitioner to the competent Court for claiming damages, if so advised. (Para 22-23)

Legal Maxim- Nullus commodum capere potest de injuria sua propria – No one can be permitted to take undue and unfair advantage of his own wrong to gain favourable interpretation of law. It is a sound principle that he who prevents a thing from being done shall not avail himself of the nonperformance he has occasioned. To put it differently, ‘a wrong doer ought not to be permitted to make profit out of his own wrong’- Referred to Union of India v. Maj. Gen. Madan Lal Yadav (1996) 4 SCC 127. (Para 18-19)

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *