UNION OF INDIA versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Article 131 of the Constitution applies only to disputes between the Union and the States arising out of their constitutional relationship, not to ordinary commercial claims for compensation such as those under Section 80 of the Indian Railways Act, 1890. Therefore, such suits are maintainable in civil courts and do...
Source-derived case information.
- Parties
- Petitioner: Union of India; Respondent: State of Rajasthan
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 04 September 1984
- Procedural Posture
- Special Leave Petition (civil) / Supreme Court Determination on Maintainability
- Outcome
- Petition dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Original Jurisdiction, Article 131, Maintainability of Suit
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Union of India
Petitioner
State of Rajasthan
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Special Leave Petition (civil) / Supreme Court Determination on Maintainability
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a suit filed by a State against the Union of India for recovery of compensation for loss on account of damage caused to goods despatched through the Indian Railways is maintainable before a civil court or must be filed under Article 131 of the Constitution in the Supreme Court
Ratio Decidendi
Article 131 of the Constitution applies only to disputes between the Union and the States arising out of their constitutional relationship, not to ordinary commercial claims for compensation such as those under Section 80 of the Indian Railways Act, 1890. Therefore, such suits are maintainable in civil courts and do not require adjudication exclusively by the Supreme Court under Article 131.
Court Disposition
Petition dismissed
Orders
- The suit is entertainable by the District Court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment