LALA RAM v. SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AND ORS
Citation: [1967] 2 S.C.R. 14; 1966 INSC 239
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: K. SUBBA RAO , M. HIDAYATULLAH, S.M. SIKRI, R.S. BACHAWAT
Judgment date:
Case summary
1966 INSC 239. Supreme Court of India judgment dated 1966-10-31. LALA RAM v. SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AND ORS. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
LALA RAM I', SUPREME COURT OF INDIA & ORS. 0Clober31, 1966 [K. SUBBA RAO, CJ. , M. HIDAYATULLAH, S. M. SIKRI AJl,'D R. S. BACHAWAT, JJ. ) Supreme Court Rules, 1966, Rules 2(2) Order XL-Deposit of cash security of Rs. 2000 a pre lication itself, as we have said, is not to enforce the fundamental right. It is true that in some cases and under certain circumstances the ,Pre-condition to furnish security may be highly prejudicial to the interests of a petitioner who has a real grievance. Such a result is inevitable in thCI application of any rule, But that ill itself cannot invalidate 11 rule which admittedly this Court has power to make under Art. 145 of the Constitution, In appropriate cases this Court has the residuary power under Order XLVII, r.
I of the Rules, for sufficient reasons shown to excuse the parties from compliance with any of the requirements of the Rules and it may also give such directions in matters of practice and procedure as it may consider just and expedient It is then contended that the enforcement of Order XL, r. 2(2) of the Rules will lead to unjustified discrimination between parties and, therefore, it offends Art. 14 of the Constitution, The discrimination alleged lies in the fact that while security need not be given as a pre-condition for the filing of any proceeding in this ·Court, it has to be given only in the case of a review petition, There is certainly a reasonable.
nexus between such a condition and the differences between parties taking different proceedings in this Court, The main distinction which makes all the difference is that in the case of a review petition this Court is asked to reopen a matte~ which has been closed after hearing the parties, This is a sufficient reason to sustain the distinction and it affords a reasonable nexus to the objects sought to be achieved by the imposition of the pre-condition. But, having regard to the circumstances of the case, in exercise of our discretionary power, we reduce the amount of cash security from Rs, 2,000 to Rs, 250 only. The said amount will be paid within two weeks from . today. Q,C, Security amount reduced.
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.