SALKIA BUSINESSMEN'S ASSOCIATION AND ORS. versus HOWRAH MUNICIPAL CORPROATION AND ORS.

Citation: [2001] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 374 · Decided: 08-08-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RAJENDRA BABU · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
SALKIA BUSINESSMEN'S ASSOCIATION AND ORS. 
v. 
HOWRAH MUNICIPAL CORPROATION AND ORS. 
AUGUST 8, 2001 
B 
[S. RAJENDRA BABU AND DORAJSWAMY RAJU, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, 1950: 
Article 226-Writ petition-Disposal of-In terms of compromise-Terms 
C of compromise part and parcel of order-However, authorities failed to comply 
with its terms-Subsequent writ petition dismissed on the ground that the 
terms were matters of contract between the parties for which compensation 
was the remedy-Correctness of-Held: Courts are bound to honour and 
implement their own orders-Otherwise rule of law becomes a casualty-As 
D long as the earlier order stood, it is not permissible to go behind the same to 
ascertain its substance or nature of compliance-Hence, High Court not justified 
in dismissing the writ petition-Practice and Procedure. 
The appellant-Association apprehending displacement of the places of 
their business for construction of a Hy-over, filed a writ petition before the 
E High Court ·against the respondent-Corporation. The writ petition was 
disposed of in terms of a compromise, which became part and parcel of the 
order of the Court. However, the respondents did not comply with the terms 
of the order. Aggrieved, the appellant filed another writ petition before the 
High Court. Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the 
terms of the compromise were of the shape of a contract between the parties 
F for which the remedy was compensation - which remedy could not be available 
in writ jurisdiction. Division Bench of the High Court also rejected the 
appellant's claim. Hence this appeal. 
G 
H 
The following question arose before this Court:-
What is the efficacy of an order passed by the Court in terms of the 
memorandum of compromise or an agreement filed in a proceeding on the 
basis of which the Court proceedings came to be finally disposed of! 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
374 
-
-
SALKJA BUSINESSMEN'S ASSN. v. HOWRAH MUNICIPALCORPN. [RAJU, J.J 375 
HELD: t. If courts are not to honour and implement their own orders, A 
and encourage party litigants-be they public authorities, to invent methods 
of their own to short circuit and give a go-bye to the obligations and liabilities 
incurred by them under orders of the court-the rule of law will certainly 
become a casualty in the process-a costly consequence to be zealously averted 
by all and at any rate by the highest Courts in States in the country. The l3 
memorandum and terms of the compromise in this case became part of the 
orders of the High Court itself when the earlier writ petition was finally 
disposed of notwithstanding that there was no verbatim reproduction of the 
same in the order. The orders passed in this regard admit of no doubt or give 
any scope for controversy. It could not have been viewed as a matter of mere 
contract between the parties and under that pretext absolve itself of the C 
responsibility to enforce it, except by doing violence to the terms thereof in 
letter and spirit. As long as the earlier order stood, it was not permissible to 
go behind the same to ascertain the substance of it or nature of compliance 
when the manner, mode and place.of compliance had already been stipulated 
with meticulous care and detail in the order itself. The said decision was also 
not made to depend upon any contingencies beyond the control of parties in 
the earlier proceedings. [377-G; 378-A, B, C, DJ 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 5183 of 
2001. 
D 
From the Judgment and Order dated 16.3.2000 of.the Calcutta High E 
Court in F.M.A.T. No. 3655 of 1996. 
Bhaskar P. Gupta, Ranjan Mukherjee and Subroto Bose for the 
Appellants. 
Tapas Ray and S.K. Bhattacharya for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
RAJU, J. Leave granted. 
F 
The simple as well as an important question arising in the appeal is as G 
to what is the efficacy of an order passed by the Court in terms of the 
memorandum of compromise or an agreement, filed in a proceedings on the 
basis of which the Court proceedings came to be finally disposed of. 
Shorn of all unnecessary details, it would suffice if a reference is made 
to the order dated 13.2.1991 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Calcutta H 
376 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2001] SUPP. I S.C.R. 
A High Court in Civil Order No.14861 (W) of 1990. The said proceedings 
came to be initiated by the Appellant Association, the members of whom 
were carrying on business
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.