Tuesday, 31 May 2022

Actus Curiae Neminem Gravabit

 Actus Curiae Neminem Gravabit




This policy has been considered important in the Indian justice system and law enforcement – that no one should suffer as a result of a court error or procedural delay – Busching Schmitz Private Limited Vs P.T. Menghani & Ors., MANU / SC / 0344/1977: AIR 1977 SC 1569: 1977 (2) SCC 835.

A bench of 3 Judges in the Supreme Court ruled that if the Court in providing information erred on the plaintiff’s obligation, although not completely terminated, the Court was allocated at least. If the respondent acts on the basis of that information the courts will not be able to prosecute him or her for the misconduct. It went on to say that “there is no higher policy directed by the Court other than that no court action should injure a defendant and it is the responsibility of the courts to determine that if a person is harmed by an offense. Of the Court should be reinstated in a position he did not hold but because of that error. This is well summarized in the principle: Actus curiae neminem gravabit; Therefore, because of a District Court error that needed to be corrected, the parties were reduced to a position in which the Court had made a mistake, an error that was corrected by SC nunc pro tunc. Jang Singh Vs Brijlal & Ors., AIR 1966 SC 1631: 1964 (2) SCR 145.

The Supreme Court used the legal term “actus curiae neminem gravabit” to support its conclusion that the legislature would not intend to set a time limit on court action in order to win a court case. Complainant – Bharat Damodar Kale & Ors. Vs State of A.P., MANU / SC / 0794/2003: AIR 2003 SC 4560: 2003 (8) SCC 559.

The Supreme Court concluded that the maxim “actus curiae neminem gravabit” forms the basis for a decision-making policy under Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure where any error arising from a decision due to a mathematical or typographical error or slip can be corrected. By the Court. After considering a number of laws, it sets out the conditions under which the Court can apply the following principles: -

In a case where it is clear that something the Court intended to do but the same slipped by mistake or error entered due to clerical or mathematical error would further the judicial conclusions so that the Court could rectify that error.

But before exercising that power the Court should be satisfied with the law and reach a legal conclusion that the order or decision contains or omits something intended to be otherwise i.e. on schedule or order due to clerk error, arithmetical error or slip slip by mistake.

Facts and circumstances may provide some clues as to the intent of the court but not necessarily the same in the order or in the order in which they were intended to be added.

The power to correct typographical errors, arithmetic or slip by accident does not give the court the power to reconsider the matter and find that a better order or declaration may be passed or appropriate. The legitimacy of the case should not be considered in order to conclude that it would be better and the merits of the matter to pass the order required to be passed in the amendment.


No comments:

Post a Comment

Privity of Contract

 PRIVITY OF CONTRACT By: Robin Pandey Date: 04/03/2022 The doctrine of "privity of contract" means that a contract is cont...