Supreme Court: Vacancies From Resignations under CUSAT Act Must Follow Communal Rotation || Supreme Court: Forest Land Cannot Be Leased or Used For Agriculture Without Centre’s Approval || Supreme Court: Gravity of Offence and Accused’s Role Must Guide Suspension of Sentence under CrPC || Supreme Court: Arbitral Awards Cannot be Set Aside For Mere Legal Errors or Misreading of Evidence || SC Acknowledges Child Trafficking as a Grave Reality and Issues Guidelines to Assess Victim Evidence || Allahabad HC: When Parties Extend an Agreement by Conduct, The Arbitration Clause Extends Too || Supreme Court: Issues of Party Capacity and Maintainability Must Be Decided by Arbitral Tribunal || Supreme Court: Omissions in Chief Examination Can Be Rectified During Cross-Examination || Supreme Court: Items Given by Accused to Police Are Not Section 27 Recoveries under Evidence Act || Gujarat High Court: Waqf Institutions Must Pay Court Fees When Filing Disputes in State Tribunal

Committee recommends modifications to Specific Relief Act 1963- (Ministry of Law and Justice) (20 Jun 2016)

MANU/PIBU/0496/2016

Contract

An Expert Committee set up to bring changes in specific performance trends submitted its report proposing amendments to the Specific Relief Act 1963.

The Committee suggests a change in approach, to make specific performance the rile, with damages being the alternative. It also proposes a more defined framework, which reduces courts’ discretion when granting performance and injunctive reliefs.

Being inherent to public interest, the Committee calls for recognising public contracts as a ‘distinct class’. It insists that such be managed through a monitoring system, one that limits interference by courts.

Tags : SPECIFIC RELIEF DAMAGES PUBLIC CONTRACTS

Share :