Skip to main content

Chhajju Ram Vs. Neki Ram & Others

Chhajju Ram Vs. Neki Ram & Others Subject matter of the case - What is the meaning of "Any other sufficient cause" and principle "of Ejusdem Generis" under Order 47 Rule 1 C.P.C. ? Facts of the case -  1. On 22nd October, 1912 one Mr. Chhajju Ram purchased certain lands of villages Kasgar and Jammi Kera from Mrs. Forbes for Rs. 42,000/- Mr. Chhajju Ram also took the possession of the above properties after the execution of the sale deed in his favour. 2. Neki Ram and others filed a suit against Chhajju Ram alleging that the execution of the above sale deed in favour of the defendant is collusive hence the same be declared null and void and the plaintiffs be given the possession of the said land on payment of Rs. 15,000/- on the basis of their preemptions. It was argued by the plaintiffs that :- i. The plaintiffs are Gaur Brahmins by caste and are the occupancy tenants of village Kasgar and were the members of Agriculture Tribes within the meaning

5 Types of Writs | Constitutional Remedies | Article 32 and Article 226


5 Types of Writs - Constitutional Remedies - Article 32 & Article 226


 Suppose you have a private property BUT -To protect that property, you are not allowed to build a fence around your property, you are not allowed to do any construction around it; nor are you allowed to evict a trespasser. In these Circumstances; Can you properly enjoy your property?

In today's article, we are going to discuss 5 kinds of writs, about protection of Fundamental Rights, Mainly about article 32 & Article 226, with important case laws. Let's start with first understanding the meaning of writs.

So, we have been provided with different rights like the Right to Education, Right to Dignity, Right to Life. but just like the example, there is no meaning of Rights until they are properly protected. To put it simply, whenever we buy any jewellery, the first thing we think about is its safekeeping. Just like that, for the protection of our Fundamental rights and their safeguard - we have some Constitutional Remedies.

Protection of Fundamental Rights has been discussed mainly in these following Articles. 
  • Firstly, Article 13 - which talks about Judicial Review. 
  • Next is Article 359, which says that Fundamental Rights cannot be curtailed; except during Emergency. 

Now Lets start our discussion! Part III of the constitution, talks about Fundamental Rights (FRs) - It extends from Article 12 -35. This means that Article 32, is in itself a Fundamental Right. Now, Art. 32 mainly talks about two types of Rights and Powers: 
  • Firstly, it says that if an individual's FR is being violated, Then he can directly use Art. 32 and approach the Supreme Court. 
  • On the other hand, Art. 32 empowers the Supreme Court to issue 5 kinds of WRITS for the  protection of FRs. 

Because of this feature of Art 32, the Supreme Court is known as "Protector & Guarantor"of FRs" Dr. B.R. Ambedkar has called this Art. as "the Heart & Soul of the Constitution". 

The powers which are vested under Art. 32; exactly same powers are also given under Art. 226. By using Art. 226 - You can approach a High Court. Thus, these two Articles give you the power to approach the highest court of the country, in case your FRs are violated. Also, in order to protect your Rights, it is not a rule that you first approach the High Court and then only approach the Supreme Court. Although, when you directly approach the Supreme Court, you will have to explain, as to why you did not 1st approach the High Court. 

Differences between Article 32 and 226

Article 32 & 226 both provide for the issuance of Writs. But there are 2 major differences between these Art:-
  • The Writ issuing power laid down under Art. 32 - is only limited to the protection of FRs.  Whereas under Art. 226, writs could be issued for "any other purpose" in addition to FRs. For example, a Writ against the decision of an administrative tribunal. 

  • As Article 32 falls under Part III of the Constitution, the constitutional remedy under it is a FR. Whereas the remedy under Art. 226 is not a FR. 


Now let's start with our main topic. But let me tell you a fact first! There are 5 types of writs: 
1. Habeas Corpus
2. Mandamus
3. Certiorari
4. Prohibition;   
5. Quo warranto

All 5 of them are Latin terms! Till now we`ve understood that "Writ" means a kind of a Remedy. So, writs have been classified under 5 heads; 
1. Habeas Corpus: It means to have a body. To produce a body. This is the most powerful and most used writ. See, if the state illegally detains a person, then such an individual by himself - or through his relatives or friends - can use the Writ of Habeas Corpus for the release of that person. So whenever you use this writ, SC or the HC asks the Detaining authority - That on what basis the person was detained? If the basis is found to be unreasonable, then the detention ends and he is to be released with immediate effect! 

You cannot use the writ of Habeas Corpus in the following 4  conditions: Lets talk about Rudul Shah v. State of Bihar. In this case - A person who had already completed his period of detention - was still kept in prison for - an EXTRA 14 yrs! In this case the Writ of Habeas Corpus was used - which led to his immediate Release. Additionally he was given Exemplary Damages! 

So Writ of Habeas Corpus is used to demand production or release of person who is illegally detained. 

2. Writ of Mandamus: Which means, 'WE COMMAND'. You can use this Writ on any statutory, non-statutory, University, Tribunals, etc. and Command them to perform their Public Duty. i.e., Through this Writ, you can command a public official to perform his Public Duty. 

Lets discuss this case to understand the Writ. In this Case, the Financial Co-op had an agreement with the Lotus Hotels that we will release the funds so that you can complete your construction work. Later, they refuse to release the Funds So, Lotus Hotels approach the Gujarat High Court Gujarat HC by using the Writ of Mandamus, directs the Authority to perform the Public Duty which it promised to perform! 

There is 1 condition pre-requisite for the application of Writ of Mandamus

  • There should be a Public Duty. 

3. Writ of Certiorari: Which means - 'To be Certified'. Thought this Writ, SC & HC, can command the Lower Courts to submit its Records - for their Review. In the review it is checked - that whether the Lower Court Judgments are illegal or not. 
Now when can Lower Corts judgments be Illegal? 
1. Excess of Jurisdiction 
2. Lack of Jurisdiction 
3. Jurisdiction is Un-Constitutional 
4. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice 

If the Lower Courts Judgments are found to be Illegal, then they are Quashed. which means that their judgment has no value now and is not to be followed. 


4. Writ of Prohibition: Let`s understand it this way:- Prohibition and Certiorari has a little difference. You must have heard of this statement- 'Prevention is Better than Cure'. The difference that`s between Prevention and Cure, the same difference exists between Prohibition and Certiorari. Remember it this way: 'P' = Prevention = Prohibition and 'C' = Cure = Certiorari. As we`ve learned that - if an illegal judgment is announced - then to Quash it - to CURE the mistake- you have to use Certiorari. But, if before the judgment is announced, if you want to PREVENT the mistake, then you use the Writ of Prohibition. Prohibition = 'To Forbid'. 

So Prohibition is used, until the Lower Court has pronounced the Judgment. And if the LC has pronounced and illegal judgment - then you use Certiorari

5. Lets understand the 5th Writ with the help of a simple example Suppose that you are a College Student - therefore, I am safely assuming that that you must have cleared college`s Entrance Eligibility - whether its Clearing 12th Board or getting minimum marks required or qualifying Entrance Exam. You must have qualified in College`s Entrance Eligibility! If it is found out that you have not cleared the Entrance Eligibility - Then you can be removed from the college. Exactly this principle is followed in the Writ of Quo Warranto, which means 'By what Authority' By using this Writ, Courts can question any Public Officer - that by what authority have you assumed this Public Office? If the Officer`s Title is defective - then he has to vaccate the Office! 

Let`s do a Quick Recap! 
1. If you have to ask a Public Officer - that by what authority have you assumed the Office - - The you use the Writ of Quo Warranto.
2. If you have to stop a Court from pronouncing a judgment - then you use the Writ of Prohibition
3. But if the Court has already pronounced the Judgment and - - you want to stop the judgment from coming into Effect - then you use the Writ of Certiorari.
4. If you want to Command a public officer - to perform his Public Duty - - Then you use the Writ of Mandamus.
5. And if you want to save a person from Illegal Detention - then use the Writ of Habeas Corpus

So these were your 5  WRITS -out of which only 'Quo Warranto' can be filed by anyone.

I  hope you liked this article. Please comment your thoughts. If you find this article useful please share it with your friends.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Theory of Corporate Personality - Company Law - Saloman v. Saloman - Lee v. Lee

 Theory of Corporate Personality - Company Law - Saloman v. Saloman - Lee v. Lee For doing a business, why people make a company? because apart from individual company has its own individual rights and advantages. In this article we will understand about "Corporate Personality" an important topic of Company law look, when ever a company is incorporated, apart from members, company has its own Legal Personality and Independent status means after incorporation, member and company separate from each other, they become a separate entity. This concept of separation is called as Corporate personality.  How this concept was developed and most importantly what is the usage of this concept, we will get to know about this from this three important case laws. The concept of Corporate Personality or Legal Personality was developed in the case of OAKES V. TURQUAND . But this concept was concreted or fully established in the case of SALOMON V. SALOMON CO LTD . Lets discuss about t

Chhajju Ram Vs. Neki Ram & Others

Chhajju Ram Vs. Neki Ram & Others Subject matter of the case - What is the meaning of "Any other sufficient cause" and principle "of Ejusdem Generis" under Order 47 Rule 1 C.P.C. ? Facts of the case -  1. On 22nd October, 1912 one Mr. Chhajju Ram purchased certain lands of villages Kasgar and Jammi Kera from Mrs. Forbes for Rs. 42,000/- Mr. Chhajju Ram also took the possession of the above properties after the execution of the sale deed in his favour. 2. Neki Ram and others filed a suit against Chhajju Ram alleging that the execution of the above sale deed in favour of the defendant is collusive hence the same be declared null and void and the plaintiffs be given the possession of the said land on payment of Rs. 15,000/- on the basis of their preemptions. It was argued by the plaintiffs that :- i. The plaintiffs are Gaur Brahmins by caste and are the occupancy tenants of village Kasgar and were the members of Agriculture Tribes within the meaning

Article 13 of the Indian constitution

Article 13 of the Indian constitution|| Doctrine of Severability|| Doctrine of Eclipse When we were making our constitution, we already had a lot of nations as example, which adopted democratic and humanitarian concept. So our founding fathers endeavoured to formulate something which reflects multiple things like rights of minority, principle of UDHR, our struggle for independence and what not. Therefore, while making the constitution,part III was discussed for 38 days. Part III exists with the objective of ; freedoms should be protected against state’s arbitrary invasion. So this means that state’s actions should be judged on the basis of their impact; freedoms of the people. This entire concept is your Article 13. Basically Article 13 deals with 4 principles relating to Fundamental Rights. First thing that you should have a clarity about what is Fundamental Rights, since when the fundament right have existed. Fundamental Rights have existed since the time our present con