LOGIN SUBSCRIBE

Contact Us

TOP STORIES NEWS UPDATES COLUMNS INTERVIEWS FOREIGN/INTERNATIONAL 

ENVIRONMENT RTI KNOW THE LAW VIDEOS SPONSORED ROUND UPS

LAW SCHOOL CORNER JOB UPDATES BOOK REVIEWS EVENTS CORNER LAWYERS & LAW
FIRMS CARTOONS लाइव लॉ हंद


Home / Columns / The Meaning Of The...

COLUMNS

The Meaning Of The Expression "Legal

Proceedings" And Its Judicial Interpretation
Dormaan Dalal 17 Nov 2020 2:00 PM

SHARE THIS -
Subscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599
Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.

The expression "legal proceeding/s" nds place in several Union and State statutes in

India. The expression is most commonly used in negatively worded sections that bar the

ling of "legal proceedings" against certain o cial or judicial functionaries. Examples of

such sections are For instance, sections such as Section 98 of the Consumer Protection

Act, 2019[1] Section 157 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017,[2] Section 42B

of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996,[3] Section 69 of the Narcotic Drugs and

Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 etc. prohibit a suit, prosecution or "other legal

proceedings" from being led against the Government or its o cials, Judicial O cers,

Arbitrators etc. The said expression is also commonly used in "Repeal and Saving"

Clauses of new statutes that save pending proceedings that may have been initiated

under a previous statute. Some examples of such clauses are Section 6 of the General

Clauses Act[4] or Section 126 (6) of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002.[5]

But what does this expression mean and what is its scope? Does it apply to purely
judicial proceedings in a court of law or can its scope expand beyond to other

proceedings that are not court proceedings but have trappings of court proceedings? Is

the meaning of the expression standardized or is it contextualized based on the statute

in which it is found? The purpose of column is to examine the meaning of this expression

and analyze its nature and scope through certain judicial decisions that have been

delivered on this aspect.

1. MEANING AND SCOPE OF "LEGAL PROCEEDINGS"

1. Black's Law Dictionary[6] de nes a "Legal Proceeding" as "any proceedings in court

of justice, whether law or equity, interlocutory or nal, by which property of debtor is

seized and diverted from his general creditors." The de nition goes on to state that

"this term includes all proceedings authorized or sanctioned by law and brought or

instituted in a court of justice or legal tribunal, for the acquiring of a right or the

enforcement of a remedy."[7]

2. As per P. Ramanatha Aiyar, Concise Law Dictionary[8],

"Legal proceeding means, -

any proceedings or inquiry in which evidence is or may be given.

an arbitration; and

any investigation or inquiry under the CrPC, 1973 (2 of 1974), or under any other law

for the time being in force for the collection of evidence, conducted by a police

o cer or by any other person (not being a magistrate) authorised in this behalf by a

magistrate or by any law for the time being in force. [Banker's Books Evidence Act

(18 of 1891), S. 2(4)]

'LEGAL PROCEEDING' means any proceeding under any law before any Court, tribunal,

o cer, authority, arbitrator, stated on a plaint, petition of appeal, application, reference, or

otherwise. [Rajasthan Relief Undertakings (Special Provision) Act (9 of 1961), S. 4 (1)(b)

Expln.]

Legal proceeding means a proceeding regulated or prescribed by law in which a judicial

decision may or must be given.

Legal proceeding mean any proceedings authorised by law for redressal of a legal

grievance of for violation of a legal right."

3. One of the earliest decisions that dealt with the expression was delivered by the

erstwhile Federal Court of India in The Governor-General in Council v. Shiromani

Sugar Mills Ltd. (In Liquidation)[9] (hereinafter referred to as "Shiromani Sugar

Mills"). The issue before the Federal Court was whether the leave of the Company
Court/Winding-up Court was necessary to be obtained by the Income- Tax o cer

under Section 171[10] of the erstwhile Companies Act, 1913 for initiating recovery

proceedings under Section 46 (2) of the Indian Income Tax Act 1922.[11] As per

Section 171, "no suit or other legal proceeding" could be proceeded with or

commenced against the company except by the leave of the Court when a winding

up order had been made or a provisional liquidator had been appointed.[12]

According to the Federal Court, the term " other legal proceedings" could not be

con ned to "original proceedings in a Court of rst instance, analogous to a suit

initiated by means of a petition similar to a plaint."[13] The Court stated that Section

171 had to be construed with reference to other sections of the Act.[14] The Court

further opined that "no narrow construction" should be placed upon the words "or

other legal proceedings" and the said words were held to cover distress and
 execution proceedings in ordinary courts.[15] One of the questions before the

Federal Court was whether recovery proceedings under Section 46 of the Indian

Income Tax Act, 1922 were covered by the phrase "other legal proceeding."[16] In the

Court's opinion it saw no reason why "in British India no " legal proceeding" can be

taken otherwise than in an ordinary Court of law, or why a proceeding taken

elsewhere than in an ordinary Court of law, provided it be taken in a manner

prescribed by law and in pursuance of law or legal enactment, cannot properly be

described as a "legal proceeding." " The Court eventually held that proceedings

under Section 46 (2) of the aforesaid Act were "other legal proceedings."

4. Shiromani Sugar Mills was subsequently relied on and followed in a series of

decisions which are brie y enumerated below:

In Binod Mills Co. Ltd. Ujjain ( M.P.) v. Suresh Chandra Mahaveer Prasad Mantri,

Bombay[17](hereinafter referred to as "Binod Mills"), the Supreme Court was dealing

with the interpretation of Section 5 of the M.P. Sahayata Upkram (Vishesh Upbandh)

Adhiniyam, 1978 as per which "no suit or other legal proceeding" could be instituted,

commenced or proceeded against an industrial undertaking during the period in

which it remained "a relief undertaking under any law, usage, custom, contract,

instrument, decree, order, award, settlement" or as per any other provision.[18] The

question before the Supreme Court was whether execution proceedings/petitions

would fall within "other legal proceedings" under Section 5 of the aforesaid Act and

once the decree was passed by the Bombay High Court and transferred to an

executing court in Madhya Pradesh (the District Judge Ujjain), could the plea of

suspension of decree under Section 5 of the Act be entertained by the executing

Court?[19] The Supreme Court held that execution proceedings would fall within the
 purview of "other legal proceedings", as not doing so "would render Section 5 of the

Act nugatory" and destroy the bene ts conferred.[20]

Shiromani Sugar Mills was also followed in a decision of the Bombay High Court in
Amravati Growers Co-operative Spinning Mills Ltd. v. Sheshrao K. Ingale and

others[21] in which the court held that the expression "other legal proceedings"

under Section 107 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960[22] would

include proceedings initiated under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of

Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971.[23]

In a recent 2016 judgement delivered by the Supreme Court in Ludocivo Sagrado

Goveia v. Cirila Rosa Maria Pinto and others,[24] the Court relied on both Shiromani

Sugar Mills and Binod Mills[25] to hold that the expression "any legal proceeding"
pending in any court found in the Repeal and Saving Clause in Section 126 (6) of the

Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002[26] would include pending execution

proceedings that had been initiated under Section 85 (c) of the repealed Multi-State

Cooperative Societies Act, 1984.[27]

5. Shiromani Sugar Mills was however distinguished by the Supreme Court in S.V.

Kandekar v. V.M. Deshpande and another[28] (hereinafter referred to as "Kandekar").

In this case, the question that required consideration was whether it was necessary

for Income Tax O cer to obtain leave of the liquidation court under Section 446 of

the Companies Act, 1956[29] in order to re-assess a company for escaped income in

respect of past years.[30] The Court distinguished Shiromani Sugar Mills on the

ground that the proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Department were recovery

proceedings after the company had been wound up, whereas in the present case

before it, the Court was dealing with assessment proceedings.[31] According to the
 Supreme Court, in Shiromani Sugar Mills, it was held that the expression "other

legal proceedings" covered distress and execution proceedings but "the expression

was not held to cover assessment proceedings" under the Income Tax Act, 1961[32]

and therefore according to the Supreme Court, Shiromani Sugar Mills would not

apply.[33] The Supreme Court eventually held that the Income Tax O cer does not

"perform the functions of a Court as contemplated by Section 446 (2) of the

Companies Act[34] and since the Income Tax Act is "a complete code" assessment

proceedings under Section 446 of the Companies Act could not be held to be "other

legal proceedings" and therefore, the leave of the liquidating court was not required.
[35]

6. Dealing with the same provision of the previous Companies Act, 1956, the Bombay

High Court in Ion Exchange Finance Ltd. and Bombay Leasing Co. Pvt. Ltd.[36] had

to decide whether the expression "suit or other legal proceedings in Section 446 (1)

and "suit or proceedings" in Section 442 of the Companies Act would include

criminal complaints led under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.[37] It

was contended by the Petitioners in the said case that the expression "legal

proceedings" or "other legal proceedings" had to be read ejusdem generis with the

expression "suit" which meant that the expression would apply only to civil

proceedings and not criminal proceedings.[38] The High Court was of the view that

wherever Parliament choose to confer power on the Company Court to try criminal

offences, it had done so,[39] like it did in Section 457 (1) (a) of the Companies Act

which used the expression "suit", "prosecution" or other legal proceedings".[40]

Therefore in this context when the word "prosecution" is used, the expression "other

legal proceedings" or "legal proceedings" would include "criminal proceedings".[41]

However, when it came to Section 446, the Court held that the expression "legal
 proceedings" in the said section meant "only those proceedings which have a

bearing on the assets of a Company in winding up or have some relation with the

issue in winding up."[42] It did not mean "each and every civil proceedings" having no

bearing on winding up proceedings or "criminal offence where the Company was

liable to be prosecuted for".[43] The Court eventually held that it was "impossible to

contend that the Company Court in winding up would have jurisdiction to stay the

criminal prosecution or that permission of the Company Court is required to

prosecute the Company for offences committed before a provisional Liquidator is

appointed or an order of winding up is made."[44]

7. The principle of ejusdem generis was also applied by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Guntur v. Ramdev Tobacco Company[45]

(hereinafter referred to as "Ramdev Tobacco") while interpreting the expression

"other legal proceedings" in Section 40 (2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, as it

stood prior to its amendment in 1973. As per Section 40 (2),

"No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall be instituted for anything done or

ordered to be done under the Act after the expiration of six months from the accrual of

the cause of action or from the date of the act or order complained of."

The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the issuance of a show cause notice

and the initiation of consequential adjudication proceedings could be described as "other

legal proceedings" within the meaning of sub-section 40(2) of the said Act.[46] By

applying the principal of ejusdem generis, the Court held that "there can be no doubt that

'suit' or 'prosecution' are those judicial or legal proceedings which are lodged in a court of

law and not before any executive authority," even if it were a statutory one.[47] The

Supreme Court then stated that "the wide expression 'other legal proceeding' must be
read ejusdem generis with the preceding words 'suit' and 'prosecution' as they constitute

a genus." The Court ultimately held that "penalty and adjudication proceedings" did not

fall within the expression "other legal proceedings."[48] Incidentally, Shiromani Sugar

Mills has not been referred to in Ramdev Tobacco.

8. The aforesaid decision along with Binod Mills and Kandekar was referred to and

relied upon by a later Bench of the Supreme Court in General O cer Commanding,

Rashtriya Ri es v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another[49] (hereinafter

referred to as the "CBI case") in which the Court was dealing with the interpretation

of Section 6 of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958[50] and the pari

materia[51] provision in Section 7 of the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir)

Special Powers Act, 1990[52] that prohibited institution of any "prosecution, suit or

other legal proceeding" without previous sanction of the Central Government. After

explaining the difference between "prosecution" and "civil suit",[53] the Supreme

Court examined the expression "legal proceeding." The relevant portion of the

judgment reads thus,

"The phrase 'legal proceeding' connotes a term which means the proceedings in a court

of justice to get a remedy which the law permits to the person aggrieved. It includes any

formal steps or measures employed therein. It is not synonymous with the 'judicial

proceedings'. Every judicial proceeding is a legal proceeding but not vice-versa, for the

reason that there may be a 'legal proceeding' which may not be judicial at all, e.g.

statutory remedies like assessment under Income Tax Act, Sales Tax Act, arbitration

proceedings etc. So, the ambit of expression 'legal proceedings' is much wider than

'judicial proceedings'. The expression 'legal proceeding' is to be construed in its ordinary

meaning but it is quite distinguishable from the departmental and administrative

proceedings, e.g. proceedings for registration of trade marks etc. The terms used in
Section 7 i.e. suit, prosecution and legal proceedings are not inter-changeable or convey

the same meaning. The phrase 'legal proceedings' is to be understood in the context of

the statutory provision applicable in a particular case, and considering the preceding

words used therein."

The Court then referred to Ramdev Tobacco and another judgment delivered by it in

Maharashtra Tubes Ltd. v. State Industrial & Investment Corpn. of Maharashtra Ltd.[54]
and further held that "Legal proceedings" do not include administrative proceedings,

departmental proceedings or proceedings before a statutory authority.

9. This has been further reiterated in a judgment delivered by the Bombay High Court

in 2019 in Prabhakar Ramchandra Desai and others v. State of Maharashtra and

Another[56] (hereinafter referred to as "Prabhakar Ramchandra Desai"). The issue

before the High Court was whether Departmental Proceedings are "other legal

proceedings" [see Section 3(p)[57]] under Section 14A of the Scheduled Caste and

Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1980.[58] The Court in this case held

that department proceedings are not "other legal proceedings."[59] The Court

referred to Ramdev Tobacco and the CBI case and set out the following precedential

aspects in relation to the expression which are as under:

"(1) If particular words of a certain genus precede a wide expression, that wide

expression must be limited to things ejusdem generis; that is, it takes colour from the

preceding words. It must receive a limited meaning.

(2) "Suit" or "prosecution" are those judicial or legal proceedings before a Court of law-but

not before any executive authority, even if a statutory one.

(3) The phrase "legal proceedings" is to be understood in the context of the statutory

provision applicable in a particular case, and by considering the preceding words if any.

(4) A departmental proceeding stands outside the scope of "legal proceedings."

(5) In the departmental proceedings, the "consequential adjudication proceedings by the

appellate authority" would not fall within the expression "other legal proceedings".

(6) The "legal proceedings" are the proceedings in a court of justice to get a remedy

which the law permits to the person aggrieved.

(7) And the legal proceedings quite differ from the departmental and administrative

proceedings."

A reading of the judgments delivered by the Supreme Court and Bombay High Court

show that the expression "legal proceedings" cannot be assigned a xed meaning and it

varies depending on the context and manner in which it is used in a provision. The

principles of statutory interpretation have to be used in order to interpret the expression

in the absence of a particular statute de ning it. However, the Supreme Court and High

Court judgments hold that "legal proceedings" are proceedings in a court of law and

cannot be extended to departmental and administrative proceedings. The judgment of

the Bombay High Court in Prabhakar Ramchandra Desai has helped simplify and

consolidate the meaning, nature and scope of the expression. This would in turn certainly

be of great assistance to both judges and advocates in dealing with this innocuous, yet

complicated expression.

Views are personal.

(The author is a practicing Advocate at the Bombay High Court and the National
Company Law Tribunal.)
Reference: -

[1] Sec 98. Protection of action taken in good faith. No suit, prosecution or other legal

proceeding shall lie against the Presidents and members of the District Commission, the

State Commission and the National Commission, the Chief Commissioner, the

Commissioner, any o cer or employee and other person performing any duty under this

Act, for any act which is in good faith done or intended to be done in pursuance of this

Act or under any rule or order made thereunder.

[2] Sec 157. Protection of action taken under this Act (1) No suit, prosecution or other

legal proceedings shall lie against the President, State President, Members, o cers or

other employees of the Appellate Tribunal or any other person authorised by the said

Appellate Tribunal for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under

this Act or the rules made thereunder.

(2) No suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings shall lie against any o cer appointed

or authorised under this Act for anything which is done or intended to be done in good

faith under this Act or the rules made thereunder.

3 Sec 42B Protection of action taken in good faith.- No suit or other legal proceedings

shall lie against the arbitrator for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be

done under this Act or the rules or regulations made thereunder."

[4] Section 6. Effect of repeal.—Where this Act, or any Central Act or Regulation made

after the commencement of this Act, repeals any enactment hitherto made or hereafter

to be made, then, unless a different intention appears, the repeal shall not—

(e) affect any investigation, legal proceeding or remedy in respect of any such right,

privilege, obligation, liability, penalty, forfeiture or punishment as aforesaid; and any such

investigation, legal proceeding or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced, and

any such penalty, forfeiture or punishment may be imposed as if the repealing Act or

Regulation had not been passed

[5] Section 126. Repeal and Savings-

(6) Save as otherwise provided in this Act, any legal proceeding pending in any court or

before the Central Registrar or any other authority at the commencement of this Act shall

be continued to be in that

court or before the Central Registrar or that authority as if this Act had not been passed.

[6] Black's Law Dictionary, Fourth Edition, p. 1041

[7] Ibid

[8] P. Ramanatha Aiyar Concise Law Dictionary, Third Edition Reprint 2006 Wadhwa

Nagpur, p. 677

[9] (1946) 8 FCR 40: 1946 SCC OnLine FC 5

[10] Section 171 Suits stayed on winding-up order: When a winding up order has been

made or a provisional liquidator has been appointed no suit or other legal proceeding

shall be proceeded with or commenced against the company except by leave of the

Court, and subject to such terms as the Court may impose.

[11] 46. Mode and time of recovery.—

(2) The Income-tax O cer may forward to the Collector a certi cate under his signature

specifying the amount of arrears due from an assessee, and the Collector, on receipt of

such certi cate, shall proceed to recover from such assessee the amount speci ed

therein as if it were an arrear of land revenue:

Provided that without prejudice to the powers conferred by this sub-section, the Collector

shall, for the purpose of recovering the amount speci ed in the certi cate, have also all

the powers which—

(a) a Collector has under the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890 (I of 1890),

(b) a Civil Court has under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), for the purpose

of the recovery of an amount due under a decree.

[12] The section corresponds to the present-day Section 279 of the Companies Act, 2013.

[13] Supra note 9 p. 55

[14] Ibid

[15] Ibid p. 56

[16] Ibid

[17] (1987) 3 SCC 99. Referred to at pp. 109-111, para 18 to 20

[18] Section 5. Suspension of suits or other legal proceedings against relief

undertakings. As from the date of speci ed in the noti cation under sub-section (1) of

section 3 no suit or other legal proceedings shall be instituted or commenced or if

pending, shall be proceeded with against the industrial undertaking during the period in

which it remains a relief undertaking any law, 4 usage, custom, contract, instrument,

decree, order, award, settlement or other provisions whatsoever, notwithstanding.

[19] Supra note 17 p. 107, 108 and 111, para 14 and 21

[20] Ibid

[21] 1992 SCC OnLine Bom 502 para 3

[22] Section 107. Bar of Suit in winding up and dissolution matters.

Save as expressly provided in this Act, no Civil Court shall take cognizance of any matter

connected with the winding up or dissolution of a society, under this Act; and when a

winding up order has been made no suit or other legal proceedings shall lie or be

proceeded with against the society or the Liquidator, except by leave of the Registrar and

subject to such terms as he may impose :

Provided that, where the winding up order is cancelled the provisions of this section shall

cease to operate so far as the liability of the society and of the members thereof to be

sued is concerned but they shall continue to apply to the person who acted as Liquidator.

[23] Section 28. Procedure for dealing with complaints relating to unfair labour practices

[24] (2016) 9 SCC 615

[25] Ibid pp. 623, 624 para 14 to 19

[26] (6) Save as otherwise provided in this Act, any legal proceeding pending in any court

or before the Central Registrar or any other authority at the commencement of this Act

shall be continued to be in that court or before the Central Registrar or that authority as if

this Act had not been passed.

[27] 85.Execution of decisions, etc

Every decision of order made under section 30, section 31, section 73, section 76,

section 90, section 92 or section 93 shall, if not carried out,-

( c ) be executed by the Central Registrar or any person authorised by him in writing in

this behalf, by attachment and sale or sale without attachment of any property of the
person or a multi-State Co-operative society against whom the decision or order has

been made.

[28] (1972) 1 SCC 438.

[29] Section 446. Suits stayed on winding up order (1) When a winding up order has

been made or the O cial Liquidator has been appointed as provisional liquidator, no suit

or other legal proceeding shall be commenced, or if pending at the date of the winding up

order, shall be proceeded with, against the company, except by leave of the Court and

subject to such terms as the Court may impose.

(2) The Court which is winding up the company shall, notwithstanding anything

contained in any other law for the time being in force, have jurisdiction to entertain, or

dispose of-

(a) any suit or proceeding by or against the company;

(b) any claim made by or against the company (including claims by or against any of its

branches in India);

(c) any application made under section 391 by or in respect of the company;

(d) any question of priorities or any other question whatsoever, whether of law or fact,

which may relate to or arise in course of the winding up of the company;

whether such suit or proceeding has been instituted, or is instituted, or such claim or

question has arisen or arises or such application has been made or is made before or

after the order for the winding up of the company, or before or after the commencement

of the Companies (Amendment) Act, 1960.

(3) Any suit or proceeding by or against the company which is pending in any Court other

than that in which the winding up of the company is proceeding may, notwithstanding

anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, be transferred to and

disposed of by that Court.

(4) Nothing in sub-section (1) or sub-section (3) shall apply to any proceeding pending in

appeal before the Supreme Court or a High Court.

[30] Supra note 28 p. 441 para 3

[31] Ibid p. 443 para 8 and p. 446 para 10

[32] Ibid pp. 443-444 para 8

[33] Ibid p. 448 para 13

[34] Supra note 29

[35] Supra note 28 p. 449 para 17

[36] 1998 SCC OnLine Bom 689

[37] Ibid para 3

[38] Ibid para 5

[39] Ibid para 7

[40] Section 457. Powers of liquidator

(1) The liquidator in a winding up by the Court shall have power, with the sanction of the

Court,-
(a) to institute or defend any suit, prosecution, or other legal proceeding, civil or criminal,

in the name and on behalf of the company;

[41] Supra note 36 para 7

[42] Ibid para 22

[43] Ibid

[44] Ibid para 24

[45] (1991) 2 SCC 119

[46] Ibid p. 123 para 4

[47] Ibid p. 124 para 6

[48] Ibid p. 126 para 8

[49] (2012) 6 SCC 228

[50] Section 6. Protection to persons acting under Act.―No prosecution, suit or other

legal proceeding shall be instituted, except with the previous sanction of the Central

Government, against any person in respect of anything done or purported to be done in

exercise of the powers conferred by this Act.

[51] Except for the use of the word "good faith" in the marginal note to Section 7 of the

Jammu and Kashmir Act, the provisions are identical.

[52] Section 7. Protection of persons acting in good faith under this Act.—No

prosecution, suit or other legal proceeding shall be instituted, except with the previous

sanction of the Central Government, against any person in respect of anything done or

purported to be done in exercise of the powers conferred by this Act.

[53] Supra note 49 p. 243 para 28

[54] (1993) 2 SCC 144

[55] Supra note 49 p. 244 para 30 to 32

[56] 2019 SCC OnLine Bom 1081

[57] Section 3. Punishments for offences atrocities.—(1) Whoever, not being a member of

a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe,—

(p) institutes false, malicious or vexatious suit or criminal or other legal proceedings

against a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe;

[58] 14A. Appeals.—(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal

Procedure,1973 (2 of 1974), an appeal shall lie, from any judgment, sentence or order, not

being an interlocutory order, of a Special Court or an Exclusive Special Court, to the High

Court both on facts and on law.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (3) of section 378 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), an appeal shall lie to the High Court against an

order of the Special Court or the Exclusive Special Court granting or refusing bail.

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, every

appeal under this section shall be preferred within a period of ninety days from the date

of the judgment, sentence or order appealed from: Provided that the High Court may

entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of ninety days if it is satis ed that

the appellant had su cient cause for not preferring the appeal within the period of ninety

days: Provided further that no appeal shall be entertained after the expiry of the period of

one hundred and eighty days.

(4) Every appeal preferred under sub-section (1) shall, as far as possible, be disposed of

within a period of three months from the date of admission of the appeal.

[59] Supra note 56 para 84

TAGS LEGAL PROCEEDINGS  INTERPRETATION  CONSTITUTION 

CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT 2017  ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 

loading....

SIMILAR POSTS + VIEW MORE

Advertisement

+ MORE
WEBINARS
[LIVE NOW] Delhi HC Women Lawyers' Forum Webinar On 'Feminist Lawyering: From Invisible To
Invincible' [Indira Jaising&Nitya Ramakrishnan]

+ MORE
LAW FIRMS
Kochhar & Co Advises Sterlite Power On A INR 20.7 Billion Mega Financing Deal

+ MORE
LATEST NEWS

1 [Communalisation Of Tablighi Jamaat] "Why Should We Refer To NSBA When You

Have Authority? If It Does Not Exist, Create One": SC Tells Centre

2 The Meaning Of The Expression "Legal Proceedings" And Its Judicial Interpretation

3 The Story Of Arbitral Meddling: Analyzing The Arbitration And Conciliation Act
(Amendment) Ordinance 2020

4 Karnataka High Court Directs Govt. To Compensate Students Who Were Denied
Bene ts Of Mid-Day Meal Scheme

5 An Employee Who Retired On 31st Of A Month Not Entitled To Increment Which

Would Have Fallen Due On 1st Of Next Month: Himachal Pradesh High Court
 "Every High Courts Have The Power To Strike Down Central Acts": Supreme Court
6 Asks Petitioner Challenging Epidemic Act To Move HC

7 Seriousness Of Crime Not A Ground To Deny Premature Release To A Life Convict;

Reformative Element To Be Considered: Bombay High Court

8 Plea Alleging Illegal Detention Of 2 Nigerian Nationals Since September 2019:

Allahabad High Court Seeks Govt. Response

लाइव लॉ हंद + MORE

सु ीम कोट ने आपरा धक प ृ ठभू म वाले यि तय के चन

ु ाव लड़ने पर तबंध संबंधी या चका क सन
ु वाई से
इनकार कया, सेपरे शन ऑफ पावर का हवाला दया
सु ीम कोट ने फर कहा: पंजीकृत द तावेज ामा णक माना जाता है , गड़बड़ी सा बत करने का दारोमदार
ामा णकता को चन
ु ौती दे ने वाले पर
SCAORA ने सु ीम कोट रिज ार से अ य अ धव ताओं के साथ वी डयो कॉ संग लंक शेयर न करने संंबं धत
सकुलर वापस लेने का आ ह कया

"हाईकोट भी आपके मौ लक अ धकार क र ा कर सकता है :" सु ीम कोट ने सीएम उ व ठाकरे के खलाफ वी स

करने वाले समीर ठ कर को हाईकोट जाने को कहा
जि टस रमना और हाईकोट के जज के खलाफ आं दे श सरकार क ेस कॉ स के खलाफ सु ीम कोट म
या चका पर सन
ु वाई से जि टस यय
ू ू ल लत ने खद
ु को अलग कया

+ MORE
INTERNATIONAL

1 UAE Decriminalizes Attempted Suicide, Alcohol Consumption & Cohabitation Of

Unmarried Couples; Amends Personal & Succession Laws

2 Johnny Depp Loses Libel Suit Against 'The Sun'; UK Court Says Article Calling Him
'Wife Beater' Substantially True [Read Judgment]

3 Singapore Arbitral Tribunal Injuncts RIL-Future Grp Deal In A Plea By Amazon,

Another Win For Gopal Subramaniam Abroad

4 'Sex Offender' ID Card Requirement Unconstitutional, Holds Louisiana Supreme

Court [Read Judgment]

ENVIRONMENT + MORE
 NGT Expands Scope Of Hearing In Case Against Use Of Firecrackers In Delhi NCR;
1 Notices Issues To 18 States & UTs [Read Order]

2 NGT To Examine Whether Use Of Firecrackers Be Prohibited In Delhi-NCR From

Nov 7-30 [Read Order]

3 Show Cause Notices Issued For Closure To Flipkart, Patanjali For Flouting Plastic
Waste Management Rules: CPCB Tells NGT [Read Report]

4 Draft EIA Noti cation 2020 Does Not Provide For Ex Post Facto Clearance To
Violation Cases: Centre Tells Lok Sabha [Read Statement]

JOB UPDATES

1. Legal Consultant Vacancy At Directorate Of Enforcement

2. Consultant (Legal) Vacancy At National Institute Of Disaster Management

3. Deputy Director (Administration & Finance) Vacancy At Bureau Of Indian Standards

4. Associate (Legal) - C Vacancy At Ministry Of Environment, Forest & Climate Change

5. Associate (Law) -B Vacancy At Ministry Of Environment, Forest & Climate Change

+ VIEW MORE
 JUST ENTER YOUR EMAIL FOR THE
LIVELAW DAILY NEWS BRIEFING BY
EMAIL ALL THE DAY'S HEADLINES AND
HIGHLIGHTS FROM LIVELAW, DIRECT
TO YOU EVERY MORNING

NEWSLETTERS
DIRECTLY IN YOUR MAILBOX

Enter Your Email

Submit

TOP STORIES KNOW THE LAW

NEWS UPDATE LAW FIRMS

COLUMNS JOB UPDATES

INTERVIEWS BOOK REVIEWS

INTERNATIONAL EVENTS CORNER

RTI UPDATES COVER STORY

EDITOR'S PICK PLACEMENTS

LAW SCHOOL CORNER SCHOLARSHIPS

ARTICLES SEMINARS

CALL FOR PAPERS ENVIRONMENT

COMPETITIONS BOOK REVIEWS

 INTERNSHIPS

© All Rights Reserved @LiveLaw

Powered By Hocalwire

Who We Are Careers Advertise With Us Contact Us Privacy Policy Terms And Conditions



X
Live Law subscriptions starting 599 +GST

Subscribe to Live Law now and get unlimited access.

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Already have an account? Sign In