EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS LTD. v. THE STATE OF MADRAS
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court
- Hon'ble Judges
- A. Koshal
- R. B. Misra
- Judgment Date
- 1981-02-19
- Court Decision / Holding
- Appeal dismissed; Special Leave refused; High Court certificate revoked; no order as to costs.
- Final Disposition
- Appeal dismissed.
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- Express Newspapers Ltd.
Respondents
- The State of Madras
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • U. R. Lalit
- • P. H. Parekh
- • Miss Manik Tarkunde
Case Synopsis & Summary
This Supreme Court decision concerns the validity of a certificate issued under Article 133(1)(a) and (c) of the Constitution of India and whether such a certificate can be revoked if it does not conform to legal requirements. The Madras High Court granted a certificate permitting an appeal to the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 322 of 1970, but challenges were raised regarding whether the certificate properly specified the substantial question of law and provided reasons for its issuance. The appellant contends that there exists a substantial question of law that merits determination and that the appeal may be treated as one under Special Leave after condoning any delay. The respondents object to the grant of Special Leave and rely on established precedents to argue the certificate may be defective if it fails to identify the principal questions of law involved and to furnish reasons for issuance. The Court cites Sohan Lal Naraindas v. Laxmidas Raghunath Gadit and Sardar Bahadur S. Indra Singh Trust v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengal, and concludes that no substantial question of law requiring determination is involved. Consequently, the Court refuses Special Leave, revokes the High Court certificate, and dismisses the appeal, with no order as to costs.
Provisions of Law Cited
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The appellant contends that the High Court certificate under Article 133(1)(a) and (c) did not specify the substantial question of law requiring determination, nor did it provide reasons for issuing the certificate. The appellant seeks to have the appeal treated as one by Special Leave after condoning any delay on the ground that a substantial question of law exists and merits determination, justifying the grant of Special Leave.
Contentions of Respondents
The respondents challenge the validity of the certificate by asserting that it fails to identify the substantial question of law and to provide reasons for its issuance. They defend the necessity of a proper certificate, rely on established precedents that require clear specification of substantial questions and reasons, and advocate against permitting an appeal without a proper certificate if such requirements are not met.
Cited Precedents (2)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sohan Lal Naraindas v. Laxmidas Raghunath Gadit | [1971] 1 S.C.C. 276 | Positive | Cited and followed as precedents establishing that a certificate under Article 133 must specify the substantial question of law and provide reasons; if not, revocation is appropriate. |
| Sardar Bahadur S. Indra Singh Trust v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengal | [1972] 1 S.C.R. 392 | Positive | Cited and followed to support the principle that improper certification affects the validity of the appeal and justifies revocation of the certificate. |
Diagnostic Tool
Does this judgment govern your specific facts?
Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS LTD. v. THE STATE OF MADRAS and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.