Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Existence of Alternative Remedies and Right to Choose - The law accepts that when two remedies are available for the same relief, a party has the option to elect one of them. The doctrine of election applies only if the remedies are co-existent, mutually exclusive, and the law recognizes both as valid options. The Supreme Court in Vidya Drolia (supra) and GAR Re-rolling Corporation (1994) emphasized that the party has the freedom to choose among available remedies, provided they are not inconsistent or repugnant 2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 640, 2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 973,
TAPAN DAS Vs M/S MAYASHEEL RETAIL INDIA LIMITED (FPRMERLY KNOWN AS MAYASHEEL RETAIL LLP), - Gauhati
.Doctrine of Election - This doctrine requires the existence of multiple remedies and a conscious choice between them. It is applicable only when remedies are incompatible and law recognizes both options. If remedies are consistent and law does not prohibit simultaneous pursuit, the doctrine does not apply
TAPAN DAS Vs M/S MAYASHEEL RETAIL INDIA LIMITED (FPRMERLY KNOWN AS MAYASHEEL RETAIL LLP), - Gauhati
.Exhaustion of Remedies and Court Jurisdiction - Courts generally require that before invoking extraordinary remedies like writs under Article 226, the aggrieved person must exhaust statutory remedies available under relevant laws. This is a discretionary rule aimed at promoting efficiency and avoiding interference in statutory processes unless fundamental rights are involved. Exceptions exist where the controversy is purely legal or fundamental rights are at stake 2022 0 Supreme(Del) 1786, 2024 0 Supreme(Guj) 528, 2024 0 Supreme(Guj) 1673, 2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 640.
Discretion and Policy - The rule of exhaustion is not mandatory but a matter of policy and discretion. Courts may entertain petitions despite available remedies if circumstances warrant, especially when fundamental rights or substantial questions of law are involved 2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 640, 2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 973, 2024 0 Supreme(All) 2077.
Conclusion:A person can choose one remedy among two alternative remedies if both are recognized by law and are mutually exclusive or incompatible. However, generally, courts prefer that the aggrieved party exhaust all statutory remedies before seeking extraordinary relief under constitutional or public law remedies, unless exceptions such as legal questions or fundamental rights apply. The doctrine of election allows for such choice, but its applicability depends on the remedies' nature and law's recognition of their coexistence 2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 640,
TAPAN DAS Vs M/S MAYASHEEL RETAIL INDIA LIMITED (FPRMERLY KNOWN AS MAYASHEEL RETAIL LLP), - Gauhati
.
In the complex world of law, individuals often face multiple paths to seek justice or enforce their rights. Imagine you're aggrieved by a or a —do you have the freedom to pick your preferred remedy, or are there restrictions? The question arises: If a person has two alternative remedies in law, can he choose one? This post delves into this pivotal legal issue, unpacking the , its applications, exceptions, and practical implications. While this provides general insights, it's not legal advice—consult a qualified attorney for your specific situation.
Alternative remedies refer to different legal avenues available to address the same grievance, such as filing a civil suit, invoking , or approaching a . Generally, a person may choose one remedy among alternatives, but this right is not absolute. It hinges on the , which governs when remedies are , inconsistent, and 1933 0 Supreme(All) 300 1998 0 Supreme(Ker) 447 1946 0 Supreme(All) 131.
The doctrine prevents a party from —pursuing simultaneously, as this could undermine justice and equity 2010 0 Supreme(Del) 895. As noted in judicial precedents, when a litigant has the right to choose between two remedies which are not but alternative, he may select and adopt one as better adapted than the other to work out his purpose; but once he has made his choice, and adopted one of the alternative remedies, his act at once operates as a bar as regards the other, and the bar is final and absolute 1933 0 Supreme(All) 300.
The doctrine applies only under specific conditions:- Two or more remedies available simultaneously: Mere availability isn't enough; they must coexist for the same .- Inconsistency or : Remedies that negate each other, like affirming and repudiating a contract.- Clear and unequivocal choice: The election must be deliberate, often manifested through actions like filing a suit 1998 0 Supreme(Ker) 447 1933 0 Supreme(All) 300.
If these elements exist, pursuing one remedy bars the other. There are three elements of election, namely, existence of two or more remedies; inconsistencies between such remedies and a choice of one of them. If any one of the three elements is not there, the doctrine will not apply
.
Not all multiple remedies trigger election. If remedies are or , they can be pursued together. For instance:- Claims for damages and injunctions may coexist if they target different aspects 2013 0 Supreme(Bom) 2038.- The Supreme Court has settled the position in law that when two remedies are available to a person aggrieved and there is no prohibition in law in pursuing of both the remedies simultaneously, then the person aggrieved can choose either to avail only one remedy or to avail both remedies to establish his rights 2020 0 Supreme(All) 20.
Conversely, choosing between a and a (e.g., under or DRT) often invokes election, as they are forums 2024 0 Supreme(All) 481 2022 0 Supreme(Del) 1756. Two remedies are alternatives to one another when the aggrieved person has a right to choose the one or the other 2016 0 Supreme(Cal) 964.
Legislation often dictates remedy choices. Certain statutes create exclusive forums, barring alternatives:- Under the , recovery proceedings are confined to , limiting other civil suits 2023 0 Supreme(SC) 706 2024 0 Supreme(All) 481.- It is settled law that if two remedies are available, a party can choose anyone of them 2014 0 Supreme(All) 2018 2014 0 Supreme(All) 1986, but statutory schemes may override this.
Courts emphasize exhaustion of statutory remedies before under , unless fundamental rights or pure legal questions are involved 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 1339. This promotes efficiency and respects legislative intent 2022 0 Supreme(Del) 1756.
The doctrine isn't rigid. Key exceptions include:- remedies: Pursuable if not inconsistent 2010 0 Supreme(Del) 895 2016 0 Supreme(HP) 1783.- Different causes of action: Independent claims allow parallel proceedings.- No statutory bar: Where law permits tandem remedies, election doesn't apply 2024 0 Supreme(All) 481.- Public interest or non-arbitrable matters: Certain disputes must go to designated courts 2022 0 Supreme(Del) 1756.
For example, challenging an offers various remedies subject to statutes, allowing choice without automatic bar 2024 0 Supreme(AP) 1490.
Navigating remedies requires caution to avoid claims 2011 0 Supreme(Pat) 1442. Here's how to proceed:- Analyze remedy nature: Are they alternative or parallel? Review precedents like Baikuntha Nath Dey v. Salim Ullah1933 0 Supreme(All) 300.- Make deliberate election: Document your choice clearly, preferably in pleadings.- Check statutes: Ensure no exclusive forum exists, e.g., limits appeals 2015 0 Supreme(Cal) 727.- Seek exhaustion where required: Courts may dismiss writs if alternatives remain untried 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 1339.
It is settled law that if two remedies are available, a party can choose anyone of them. Merely for the reason that the decree holder has a remedy to seek recall... does not mean that he has no right to apply afresh if time permits 2014 0 Supreme(All) 1986.
In summary, yes—a person generally can choose one of two alternative remedies, but the imposes limits when remedies are inconsistent and . Once elected unequivocally, switching is typically barred 1946 0 Supreme(All) 131. However, compatible or remedies allow flexibility, subject to statutory dictates. Always weigh options carefully to align with justice principles.
Key Takeaways:- Election requires , and clear choice.- Pursue remedies if non-conflicting.- Respect statutory forums to avoid bars.- Consult professionals for tailored strategy.
This overview draws from established precedents; outcomes vary by facts. For personalized guidance, engage a legal expert.
- Three elements of election.
accepts existence of arbitration as an alternative remedy and freedom to choose is available. ... them, but that doctrine would not apply to cases where the ambit and scope of the two remedies is essentially different. ... The Supreme Court in Paragraph 55 of Vidya Drolia (supra) had held that the doctrine of election to select arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism by mutual agreement is available, only if the #HL_....
However, that would not mean that writ jurisdiction can be exercised in every case, where alternative remedies are available to safeguard the interest of the aggrieved person. ... Hundred and Fifty Two Crores Thirty Six Lakhs Twenty Three Thousand Eight Hundred and Sixty Two Only). ... interest of aggrieved person. ... Further, empty and self-defeating affidavits or statements of Governm....
It is thus evident that the remedies available to an aggrieved person under the SARFAESI Act are both expeditious and effective. 43. ... Nat Bell Liquors Ld. [(1922) 2 A.C. 128] Lord Sumner said: “That supervision goes to two points; one is the area of the inferior jurisdiction and the qualifications and conditions of its exercise; the other is the observance of the law in the course of its exercise.” .....
There is no dispute on the proposition of law that the ex parte decree can be challenged by way of various remedies provided under law subject to the statutory provisions. ... Challenging the same order, the petitioner filed present two revision petitions, one with respect to rejection of the application for condonation of delay and the other against the order refusing to set aside the order, dated 18.08.....
Judiciously exercising available discretion to do justice is acceptable to law. However, exercising discretion as per the whims of the authorities could only lead to one result and that is injustice. ... One of the restrictions placed on the power of the High Court is where an effective alternate remedy is available to the aggrieved person; (iii) Exceptions to the rule of alternate remedy arise where (a) the writ petition ....
There are three elements of election, namely, existence of two or more remedies; inconsistencies between such remedies and a choice of one of them. If any one of the three elements is not there, the doctrine will not apply. ... Doctrine of election to select arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism by mutual agreement is available only if the law accepts existence of arbitration as ....
One of the restrictions placed on the power of the High Court is where an effective alternate remedy is available to the aggrieved person. 27.3. ... Therefore, in all such cases, the High Court must insist that before availing remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution, a person must exhaust the remedies available under the relevant statute. 44. ... remedy is a rule of discretion and not one of compulsi....
Therefore, in all such cases, the High Court must insist that before availing remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution, a person must exhaust the remedies available under the relevant statute. 44. ... As per the appellant Company, after receiving the show cause notices, 2(two) weeks’ further time were sought for by it for giving reply to the said show cause notices. ... The Court further held that though the rule of exhaustion of #HL_ST....
Therefore, in all such cases, the High Court must insist that before availing remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution, a person must exhaust the remedies available under the relevant statute. 44. ... The law with regard to entertaining a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in case of availability of alternative remedy is well settled. In the case of Satyawati Tondon (supra), this Court observed thus: "43. .....
legal remedies.'' ... convenience and discretion rather than a rule of law. ... remedy is a rule of discretion and not one of compulsion. ... But this rule requiring the exhaustion of statutory remedies before the writ will be granted is a rule of policy, convenience and discretion rather than a rule of law and instances are numerous where a writ of certiorari has been issued in spite of the fact that the....
The Supreme Court has settled the position in law that when two remedies are available to a person aggrieved and there is no prohibition in law in pursuing of both the remedies simultaneously, then the person aggrieved can choose either to avail only one remedy or to avail both remedies to establish his rights. The Board of Revenue under some misconception of law, had come to the conclusion that the Recall application having been filed, no Revision was maintainable simultaneo....
Two remedies are alternatives to one another when the aggrieved person has a right to choose the one or the other.....” Another judgment of this Court delivered on March 2, 2016, in W.P. No. 1330 of 2015 in the case of Khoja Sunnat Jamat & Another Vs. Board of Wakf stands in the same row indicating that where efficacious remedy is available in the statute, the High Court ought to have remained within well recognised constraints to restrain itself from exercising its extra-ord....
Against the order of the Tribunal an aggrieved person can approach the High Court only under s.83(9) of the Wakf Act, 1995. As has been held by the Supreme Court the remedy under s.83 of the Wakf Act, 1995 is the only remedy of the aggrieved persons such as the petitioners. It is just one other remedy falling within the genus other remedies, only a species whereof is an alternative remedy. Two remedies are alternatives to one another when the aggrieved person has a right to choose th....
It is settled law that if two remedies are available, a party can choose anyone of them. Merely for the reason that the decree holder has a remedy to seek recall of the order dismissing execution in default under Rule 106 Order 21 C.P.C. does not mean that he has no right to apply afresh if time permits. Therefore, it was not necessary for the decree holder to have applied for recall of the order dismissing execution in default."
It is settled law that if two remedies are available, a party can choose anyone of them. Therefore, it was not necessary for the decree holder to have applied for recall of the order dismissing execution in default. Merely for the reason that the decree holder has a remedy to seek recall of the order dismissing execution in default under Rule 106 of Order 21, C.P.C. does not mean that he has no right to apply afresh if time permits.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
