“Judicial Discipline and Propriety: Navigating the Nuances of Dissenting Financial Creditor Rights”

Case name: Mary Pushpam vs. Telvi Curusumary & Ors.

Case no: 2024 Legal Eagle 7

Court name: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: January 3, 2024

Bench: VIKRAM NATH, J

Introduction

The case of Mary Pushpam vs. Telvi Curusumary & Ors., 2024 Legal Eagle 7, is a legal dispute involving service law and selection in India. The case was decided on January 3, 2024, by the Supreme Court of India. The case is related to a suit for possession, and the court emphasized the importance of accurately detailing the property in question within the suit for possession. The court also highlighted the principles of judicial discipline and propriety, stating that lower or subordinate courts should not contradict decisions of higher courts. The case is cited as 2024 INSC 8 and is available on various legal platforms, such as GOJURIS  and Legal Eagle Elite.

Background

Here are the background details of the Mary Pushpam vs. Telvi Curusumary & Ors., 2024 Legal Eagle 7 case:

• The case was decided on January 3, 2024, by the Supreme Court of India.
• The case is related to a suit for possession.
• The factual background of the case was such that the appellant filed a suit for possession, and the court emphasized the importance of accurately detailing the property in question within the suit.
• The court highlighted the principles of judicial discipline and propriety, stating that lower or subordinate courts should not contradict decisions of higher courts.
• The High Court had restored and confirmed the judgment of the trial court, but the Supreme Court set aside the judgment of the High Court and restored the judgment of the Sub-Judge.
• The respondents-plaintiff had based their case on the ground that they had purchased 8 cents and had trespassed over part of the purchased land.

Decision of the court

In the Mary Pushpam vs. Telvi Curusumary & Ors., 2024 Legal Eagle 7 case, the Supreme Court of India allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the High Court, and restored the judgment of the Sub-Judge. The case was related to a suit for possession, and the court emphasized the importance of accurately detailing the property in question within the suit for possession. The court also highlighted the principles of judicial discipline and propriety, stating that lower or subordinate courts should not contradict decisions of higher courts. The High Court had restored and confirmed the judgment of the trial court, but the Supreme Court set aside the judgment of the High Court and restored the judgment of the Sub-Judge.

Potential questions this judgement tends to answer

• What is the importance of accurately detailing the property in question within a suit for possession?

• What are the principles of judicial discipline and propriety, and how do they apply to lower or subordinate courts?

• How can lower or subordinate courts ensure consistency with decisions of higher courts?

• What is the role of the doctrine of precedents in promoting consistency in judicial decisions?

  Case name: Mary Pushpam vs. Telvi Curusumary & Ors.

WRITTEN BY: Pankhuri Rastogi

The Supreme Court of India

Unfold Law – Law Firm in Bangalore, Lawyers in Bangalore