Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 21 views

    Cheviti Ven Case

    Uploaded by

    Pranit Dhokale
    The Supreme Court discussed the legislative device of abrogation to remove the basis of a court's judgment and change laws retrospectively. While the legislature cannot encroach on judicial power, it can nullify a decision's effects by changing laws retrospectively. The Court cited past cases that outlined principles for when a subsequent law can abrogate an earlier court judgment, such as curing defects in the invalidated law. The legislature has the power to retrospectively amend laws to remove causes of invalidity or ineffectiveness, not to overrule courts but rather enact fresh law with retrospective effects.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Cheviti Ven Case

    Uploaded by

    Pranit Dhokale
    21 views1 page
    The Supreme Court discussed the legislative device of abrogation to remove the basis of a court's judgment and change laws retrospectively. While the legislature cannot encroach on judicial power, it can nullify a decision's effects by changing laws retrospectively. The Court cited past cases that outlined principles for when a subsequent law can abrogate an earlier court judgment, such as curing defects in the invalidated law. The legislature has the power to retrospectively amend laws to remove causes of invalidity or ineffectiveness, not to overrule courts but rather enact fresh law with retrospective effects.

    Original Title

    cheviti ven case

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court discussed the legislative device of abrogation to remove the basis of a court's judgment and change laws retrospectively. While the legislature cannot encroach on judicial power, it can nullify a decision's effects by changing laws retrospectively. The Court cited past cases that outlined principles for when a subsequent law can abrogate an earlier court judgment, such as curing defects in the invalidated law. The legislature has the power to retrospectively amend laws to remove causes of invalidity or ineffectiveness, not to overrule courts but rather enact fresh law with retrospective effects.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    21 views1 page

    Cheviti Ven Case

    Uploaded by

    Pranit Dhokale
    The Supreme Court discussed the legislative device of abrogation to remove the basis of a court's judgment and change laws retrospectively. While the legislature cannot encroach on judicial power, it can nullify a decision's effects by changing laws retrospectively. The Court cited past cases that outlined principles for when a subsequent law can abrogate an earlier court judgment, such as curing defects in the invalidated law. The legislature has the power to retrospectively amend laws to remove causes of invalidity or ineffectiveness, not to overrule courts but rather enact fresh law with retrospective effects.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    Supreme Court lays down Principles for exercise of legislative power of abrogating a

    law declared invalid by Court.

    “If the legislature merely seeks to validate the Acts, struck down or rendered inoperative by
    a Court, by a subsequent legislation without curing the defects in such legislation, the
    subsequent legislation would be ultra-vires“.

    Supreme Court: While a batch of civil appeals assailing the Himachal Pradesh High
    Court’s orders, whereby the Himachal Pradesh Passengers and Goods Taxation Act, 1955
    (‘Act, 1955’) as amended from time to time by the Himachal Pradesh Passengers and
    Goods (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1997 (‘Amendment Act, 1997’) were upheld, the
    Division Bench of B.V. Nagarathna* and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. Discussed the law around
    legislative power to abrogation and laid down certain inexhaustive principles to be followed
    in exercise of legislative devise of abrogation.

    Analysis

    The Court discussed the law around the adoption of the legislative device of abrogation, to
    remove the basis of a judgment of a Court in a legislation. The Court referred to Tirath Ram
    Rajendra Nath v. State of U.P., (1973) 3 SCC 585, wherein it was held that there is a
    distinction between encroachment on the judicial power and nullification of the effect of a
    judicial decision by changing the law retrospectively, the former is outside the competence
    of the legislature, but the latter is within its permissible limits. The Court also cited Indian
    Aluminium Co. v. State of Kerala, (1996) 7 SCC 637 and other catena of judgments wherein,
    the principles regarding the abrogation of a judgment of a Court of law by a subsequent
    legislation were culled out. It was noted that in Cheviti Venkanna Yadav v. State of
    Telangana, (2017) 1 SCC 283, it was held that held that the legislature has the power to
    legislate including the power to retrospectively amend laws, thereby removing causes of
    ineffectiveness or invalidity of laws. Further, when such correction is made, the purpose
    behind the same is not to overrule the decision of the court or encroach upon the judicial
    turf, but simply enact a fresh law with retrospective effect to alter the foundation and
    meaning of the legislation and to remove the base on which the judgment is founded….

    https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2023/09/08/sc-lays-down-principles-for-exercise-
    of-legislative-power-of-abrogating-a-law-legal-news/

    You might also like