Limits on Jurisdiction of the High Courts under Article 227 | Garment Craft v. Prakash Chand Goel | Important Acts and Laws for Judiciary Exams PDF Download

Supreme Court Case: Garment Craft v. Prakash Chand Goel

• In a recent case, the Supreme Court of India clarified the revisional jurisdiction of high courts under Article 227 of the Constitution. The court emphasized that this jurisdiction is not meant to correct every error but to address grave derelictions of duty or violations of fundamental legal principles.
• The case involved an appellant in judicial custody in Jaipur, unable to appear before the Delhi High Court for a civil suit. Despite several legal twists, the apex court eventually ruled that the High Court's interference under Article 227 was unwarranted as the lower court's decision did not exhibit errors justifying such intervention.
• Furthermore, the Supreme Court highlighted that the powers under Article 227 are limited compared to Article 226 and should be sparingly used to ensure justice without becoming an avenue for routine appeals.

Limitations of Article 227 and Judicial Interpretations

• The Supreme Court has consistently emphasized that Article 227 grants high courts powers of superintendence over lower courts and tribunals, not as a means to act as appellate courts. This distinction is crucial to prevent endless litigation and maintain judicial efficiency.
• Additionally, the judiciary has underscored the importance of respecting arbitral tribunals and promoting a pro-arbitration stance to minimize judicial interference in arbitration proceedings.