Explained| Supreme Court’s judgment on classifying borrower’s accounts ‘fraudulent’ by Lender Banks vis-a-vis Audi Alteram Partem
‘Audi alteram partem application cannot be impliedly excluded under the Master Directions on Frauds.’
‘Audi alteram partem application cannot be impliedly excluded under the Master Directions on Frauds.’
The Supreme Court observed that principles of natural justice should be necessarily read into the provisions of the Master Directions on Frauds, to save it from the vice of arbitrariness.
by Vijay K. Tyagi†
In Union of India v. W.N. Chadha,1993 Supp (4) SCC 260, the bench of S. Ratnavel Pandian and K. Jayachandra Reddy, JJ explained the exclusion of the application of the principle of audi alteram partem in relation to an accused at the stage of investigation.
Calcutta High Court: Md. Nizamuddin, J. disposed of a petition which was filed challenging the impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner
Gujarat High Court: A.P. Thaker, J. decided over a petition wherein the case of the petitioner was that the properties in question
Uttaranchal High Court: Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J., allowed petitions which were filed having the common question of law and facts thus were
Rajasthan High Court: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J., disposed of a petition which was filed against the order passed by the Additional Session
Uttaranchal High Court: The Division Bench of Narayan Singh Dhanik and Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, JJ., disposed of a writ petition while giving
Kerala High Court: B. Sudheendra Kumar J., allowing the present petition, held, “power conferred on the Drug Disposal Committee is not an
Allahabad High Court: The Division Judge Bench of Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Dr Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, JJ., disposed off a writ petition
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of RF Nariman, Navin Sinha and KM Joseph has reiterated the principles of natural justice as follows:
Delhi High Court: Vibhu Bakhru, J. while addressing the petitions filed in respect to the impugned list of directors stated to have
Karnataka High Court: B.A. Patil, J. while allowing the appeal set aside the Judgment of the trial court with a direction to
Patna High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J. quashed an office order issued against a delinquent employee
Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Sanjay Karol, acting CJ. and Ajay Mohan Goel, J., decided a letters patent
Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench of the Delhi High Court emphasized on the importance of Natural Justice. The Court expunged