2018 (9) TMI 1077

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ransferred to Bhubaneswar, Orissa in view of Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Ordinance, 2015 since the complainant/ Respondent No.2 National Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. had its account at Indian Overseas Bank, Bhubaneswar, Orissa. 2. Briefly stated, complainant/ Respondent No. 2 was engaged in the marketing of agricultural produce and financial activities. Petitioner No.1, a proprietorship firm, had approached the complainant/ Respondent No. 2 for financial assistance. Petitioner entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with complainant/ Respondent No.2 vide agreement dated 5th July, 2004 for availing financial assistance for various items like dry fruits, oil and cake, kirana items, herbs, food grain,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in Transfer Petition (Crl.) 513/2008, Supreme Court of India stayed the proceedings in the aforesaid complaint case pending before the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhubaneswar, Orissa. 7. Vide order 27th September, 2010 Supreme Court of India allowed the aforesaid Transfer Petition and transferred the complaint case titled as 'National Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. v. Roshan Lal Lalit Mohan' to the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi which is reproduced as under: "In this Transfer Petition, notice was issued. Despite service of notice, nobody appears for the petitioner. In pursuance of the notice, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, on instruction, submits that the respond....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e, 2015 shall be transferred to the court having jurisdiction under sub-section (2) of Section 142 as if that sub-section had been in force at all material items." A bare reading of the above, clearly discloses the use of a non obstante clause, the necessary implication of which is that the transfer of the case u/s 142 of the New Act, shall take place notwithstanding any judgment to the contrary. This appears to be the clear legislative intent, which would stand defeated if the interpretation advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the complainant is to be acceded to. For the foregoing reason, no cause for recalling of the order is made out. Let the order of transfer dated 15.10.2015 be compiled with. Since the date originally fixed for heari....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to subserve the interest of justice. In other words, even if the provision empowering courts to direct transfer from one court to other were to stand deleted from the statute, the superior courts would still be competent to direct such transfer in appropriate cases so long as such courts are satisfied that denial of such a transfer would result in violation of the right to access to justice to a litigant in a given fact situation. 42. Now if access to justice is a facet of the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, a violation, actual or threatened, of that right would justify the invocation of this Court's powers under Article 32 of the Constitution. Exercise of the power vested in the Court under that Articl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ithdrawal and transfer of cases to the Apex Court is, in the opinion of the Court, necessary for the purpose of effectuating the high purpose of Articles 136 and 142(1), the power under Article 139-A must be held not to exhaust the power of withdrawal and transfer. Article 139-A, it is relevant to mention here, was introduced as part of the scheme of the Constitution Forty-second Amendment. That amendment proposed to invest the Supreme Court with exclusive jurisdiction to determine the constitutional validity of Central laws by inserting Articles 131-A, 139-A and 144-A. But Articles 131-A and 144-A were omitted by the Forty-third Amendment Act, 1977, leaving Article 139-A intact. That Article enables the litigants to approach the Apex Court....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and general issues of public policy and not merely incidental to a particular statutory scheme or pattern. It will again be wholly incorrect to say that powers under Article 142 are subject to such express statutory prohibitions. That would convey the idea that statutory provisions override a constitutional provision. Perhaps, the proper way of expressing the idea is that in exercising powers under Article 142 and in assessing the needs of "complete justice" of a cause or matter, the Apex Court will take note of the express prohibitions in any substantive statutory provision based on some fundamental principles of public policy and regulate the exercise of its power and discretion accordingly. The proposition does not relate to the powers ....