KULCHHINDER SINGH & ORS. versus HARDAYAL SINGH BRAR & ORS.

KULCHHINDER SINGH & ORS. versus HARDAYAL SINGH BRAR & ORS.

Article 226 cannot be used to enforce contractual obligations in the ordinary course without statutory complexion. Enforcement of a mere binding contract between employees and the Cooperative Bank is not available through writ jurisdiction.

Parties
Appellants: Kulchhinder Singh & Ors.; Respondents: Hardayal Singh Brar & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
18 March 1976
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order of Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 6344/74
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Writ Jurisdiction, Enforcement of Contractual Obligations, Definition of State Under Article 12, Public Authority, Jurisdiction Under Article 226
Constitutional Law Writ Jurisdiction Enforcement of Contractual Obligations Definition of State Under Article 12 Public Authority Jurisdiction Under Article 226

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kulchhinder Singh & Ors.

Appellants

Hardayal Singh Brar & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order of Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 6344/74

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a contractual obligation can be enforced by writ jurisdiction under Article 226
  2. 2 Whether a co-operative society is 'other authority' or public authority within the meaning of Article 12

Ratio Decidendi

Article 226 cannot be used to enforce contractual obligations in the ordinary course without statutory complexion. Enforcement of a mere binding contract between employees and the Cooperative Bank is not available through writ jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed