CUSTOM SEARCH

WHAT IS SUFFICIENT CAUSE ?

Justice A. Ananda of Karnataka High Court in the case of Smt K M Sharmila Umesh vs Smt Maryamma observed as follows:- “In the decision of (Parimal vs Veena @ Bharti) reported in (2011) 3 SCC 545, at paragraph 13, the Supreme Court has held as under: "Sufficient cause" is an expression which has been used in a large number of statutes. The meaning of the word "sufficient" is "adequate" or "enough", inasmuch as may be necessary to answer the purpose intended. Therefore, word "sufficient" embraces no more than that which provides a platitutde which when the act done suffices to accomplish the purpose intended in the facts and circumstances existing in a case and duly examined from the viewpoint of a reasonable standard of a cautious man. In this context, "sufficient cause" means that the party had not acted in a negligent manner or there was a want of bona fide on its part in view of the facts and circumstances of a case or the party cannot be alleged to have been "not acting diligently" or "remaining inactive". However, the facts and circumstances of each case must afford sufficient ground to enable the court concerned to exercise discretion for the reason that whenever the court exercises discretion, it has to be exercised judiciously. (Vide Ramlal v. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 SC 361; , Lonand Grampanchayat v. Ramgiri Gosavi AIR 1968 SC 222; Surinder Singh Sibia v. Vijay Kumar Sood AIR 1992 SC 1540; and Oriental Aroma Chemical Industries Ltd., v. Gujarat Industrial Development Corpn. (2010) 5 SCC 459). In the aforestated judgment, the Supreme Court has held the facts and circumstances of each case must afford sufficient ground to enable the Court concerned to exercise discretion for the reason that whenever the Court exercises discretion, it has to be exercised judiciously.

No comments:

KARNATAKA LAND LAWS