INDIAN PETROCHEMICALS CORPN. LTD. AND ANR.versusSHRAMIK SENA AND ORS .
- Citation
- 1999 INSC 162
- Decided
- 8 April 1999
Holding
An additional affidavit setting out new facts may not be filed or taken on record in a pending appeal without the Court's express permission.
Summary
In the civil appeals filed by India Petrochemicals Corp. Ltd. (employer) and the employees arising from a Bombay High Court judgment, the employees attempted to introduce an additional affidavit dated 19 February 1999 without any court order permitting its filing. The employer did not file a reply to the affidavit. The Supreme Court held that an affidavit containing new facts cannot be filed and taken on record unless the Court expressly authorises it. Consequently, the Court issued a practice direction directing the Registry to prevent the acceptance of unauthorised affidavits in pending appeals. The matter was adjourned for four weeks to allow the employer to file a reply, and the appeal was treated as part‑heard.
Issues considered
- The permissibility of filing an additional affidavit containing new facts without express permission of the Court in a pending appeal.
Subjects
Judgment
INDIAi-.J PETROCHEMICALS CORPN. LTD. AND ANR. A
v.
SHRAMIK SENA AND ORS .
•
APRIL 8, 1999
[S.P. BHARUCHA, R.C. LAHOTI AND N. SANTOSH HEGDE, JJ.] B
Supreme Court-Practice and Procedure direction-Filing of
Additional affidavit-In the said affidavit additional facts placed on record-
Permissibility of-Held, no such affidavit could have been filed and taken on
record without the express permission of the Court-Direction to registry to c
ensure that no affidavits are taken on record in pending appeals without
permission of the Court.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1854 of
1998.
D
From the Judgment and Order -fated 29 .8.1997 of the High Court of
Bombay in W.P. No. 2206/97.
·Mr. T.R. Andhyarujina with Mis. H.S. Parihar, K.S. Parihar, S. Birla and
M.M. Verma for Appellants.
E
Mis. G.K. Banerjee, R.S. Raymond, R.N. Karanjawala, Nandini Gore,
Sandeep Mittal, Manik Karanjawala, Mr. K.K. Singhvi with Mis. S. Pakale, F.
Rashid and A.K. Gupta for Respondents.
The Order of the Court was delivered by
F
Civil Appeal No. 1854 of 1998 by the employer and Civil Appeal No.
1855 of 1998 by the employees arise from the same judgment of the High
Court. Reliance was placed, during the course of their hearing, on an additional
affidavit dated 19th February, 1999, filed recently (22nd February, 1999) on
behalf of the employees. There is no reply by the employer to the said
affidavit. G
- There is no order of the Court that permits an additional affidavit to be
filed. It is stated by the learned advocate-on-record for the employees that,
as a matter of practice, such affidavits are filed and the Registry accepts them.
The said affidavit is an affidavit in which facts are pleaded, additional H
539
A.
540 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1999] 2 S.C.R.
A to the facts placed before the High Court. No such affidavit could have been
filed and taken on record without the express permission of the Court to file
the affidavit and place additional material on record. The Registry is hereby
directed to ensure that no affidavits are ta.ken on record in pending appeals,
especially if they set out facts, unless orders of the Court permit them to be
B filed. This order shall be treated as a practice direction to be complied with
hereafter in all matters.
· Adjourned for four weeks to enable the employer to file a reply to the
said affidavit. To be treated as part-heard.
T.N.A. Appeal pending.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.