GOVERNMENT OF ORISSA versus M/S. ASHOK TRANSPORT AGENCY AND ORS.

GOVERNMENT OF ORISSA versus M/S. ASHOK TRANSPORT AGENCY AND ORS.

Difference of opinion among the Judges: Per Shah, J., decree not executable against State unless procedural steps are taken under CPC; per Agrawal, J., though decree is not a nullity, it is voidable, and challenge must be through properly constituted suit, not by Section 47 objection. Matter referred to larger Bench for determination.

Parties
Appellant: Government of Orissa; Respondents: M/s. Ashok Transport Agency and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
30 April 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Referred to Larger Bench Due to Difference of Opinion
Outcome
Matter referred to larger Bench due to difference of opinion
Legal Topics
Execution of Decree, Devolution of Interest, Succession in Litigation, Orissa Mining Corporation (acquisition and Transfer of Charge Chrome Division) Ordinance, 1991

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 6 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Government of Orissa

Appellant

M/s. Ashok Transport Agency and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Referred to Larger Bench Due to Difference of Opinion

  1. 1 Whether an ex-parte decree against a company taken over by State Government can be executed against the government even though the same was not brought on record before passing the decree

Ratio Decidendi

Difference of opinion among the Judges: Per Shah, J., decree not executable against State unless procedural steps are taken under CPC; per Agrawal, J., though decree is not a nullity, it is voidable, and challenge must be through properly constituted suit, not by Section 47 objection. Matter referred to larger Bench for determination.

Court Disposition

Matter referred to larger Bench due to difference of opinion

Orders

  • The registry is directed to place the matter before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for appropriate directions.
  • Appeal dismissed; no order as to costs.