| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Specific Relief Act 1963 ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Specific Relief Act 1963
The 'Specific Relief Act 1963' is an Act of the Parliament of India large number of remedial aspects of law. It came in the replacement of the earlier Act of 1877. Protection of life and property cannot be assured by a simple declaration of rights and duties. The enumeration of rights and duties must be supplemented by legal devices which help the individual to enforce his rights. Social redress must be provided to every person who is injured in the social process.〔''Ashok Kumar Srivastav v. National Insurance Co. Ltd''., (1998) 4 SCC 361 : 1998 SCC (L&S) 1137: (1998) 2 LLN 987:(1998) 2 LLJ 699.〕 Basically, the mission of the Specific Act is to assure that whenever there is a wrong there must be a remedy.
Remedies are generally provided by the branch of substantive law which defines its rights and duties for its own purposes. The law of contract provides the remedy of damages for breach of contract. Similarly the law of tort provides for recovery in cases of tortuous wrongs. However, substantive laws can never afford to be exhaustive in terms of their remedies and reliefs. Scope of the Act remains specific to provide a network of relief. The Act does not confer any Rights on itself. Specific relief is only provided for the violation of a legal right. The network of reliefs allowed by this Act falls under the following outlines:
==Recovery of possession of property==
Though the Specific Relief Act is concerned only with the enforcement of civil rights and not penal laws, even civil law has to take care of certain rights, the violation of which is capable of creating serious violent clashes, and these are rights to possession of property. The very first chapter provides relief to those who have been dispossessed of their property.〔''East India Hotels Ltd v. Syndicate Bank'', 1992 Supp (2) SCC 29, 36, lease premises had to be vacated because of fire, earlier the lessor had terminated the lease on expiry of term, the lessee was seeking extension for another term, whether the lessee was entitled to be put back into possession, directed to be referred to larger Bench. ''Ramachandran Nair v. Sukumaran'', AIR 2002 Ker 394, possession not proved. ''Puthukkattil Parangodan v. Puthukkattil Parameswaran'', AIR 2002 Ker 221, the subject-matter of the tenancy was completely destroyed and the lease automatically terminated. But even so the landlord could claim and recover possession only through the court process. ''Ramchandra Sakharam Mahajan v. Damodar Trimbak Tanksale'', (2007) 6 SCC 737: AIR 2007 SC 2577, the court explained the basic requirements of the suit.〕—Nair Services Society Vs. K C Alexander (India Reporter ) AIR Year of Judgment-1968 SC (Court of India ) Page No.1165—No suit for dispossession against the government is maintainable under Specific Relief Act.
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Specific Relief Act 1963」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|