Sanatan Gauda vs. Berhampur University Case Summary 1990 SC

Sanatan Gauda vs. Berhampur University Case Summary 1990 SC

Sanatan Gauda vs. Berhampur University case is a landmark case of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The major fundamental concept involved in this case was the concept of ‘Estoppel’, which is covered under Section 115 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

RELEVANT PROVISION:

Section 115 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Estoppel is that rule which prohibits a person from contradicting what was earlier said by him in a court of law, which was a concept discussed in this case.

FACTS OF SANATAN GOUDA CASE:

  • Sanatan Gauda passed his M.A. examination in July 1981, securing an aggregate of 364 marks out of 900 marks, i.e., over 40 percent of the total marks.
  • In 1983, he secured admission to Ganjam Law College, which was affiliated with Berhampur University.
  • At the time he took admission, he had submitted his marks sheet along with his M.A. degree certificate.
  • The appellant completed his first-year course & second year in 1984 & 1985, respectively. He was admitted in his final years in 1985. But his result for the first & second years was not declared.
  • On November 14, 1986, the Chairman of the Board of Studies wrote to the Deputy Registrar of the University pointing out that the Board of Studies in its meeting held on October 29, 1986, had recommended that those students who had passed their M.A. examination and had secured over 40 percent of the total marks should be considered eligible for admission to the Law course even though they had secured less than 20 percent marks in any of the papers in the said examinations.
  • Despite this, the University did not take any step to announce the appellant’s results.
  • High Court – Writ petition was filed before High Court but that was dismissed. An appeal was filed before Supreme Court.

LEGAL ISSUE:

Whether the appellant eligible to be admitted to Law Course?

Whether the University estopped from declaring the admission of the appellant as void when initially the University itself admitted him and allowed him to take the semester exams?

RATIO & DECISION:

The judgment was delivered by Judges L.M Sharma and P.B Sawant.

  • In the current case, the Apex Court saw that the appellant, while getting his affirmation in the Law College, had admittedly presented his imprint sheet alongside the application for confirmation.
  • The Law College had conceded him. He had sought after his examinations for quite a long time. The University had likewise allowed him the confirmation card for the Pre-Law and intermediate law examinations.
  • He was allowed to show up in the said examinations. He was likewise conceded to the final year of the course. It is just at the phase of the declaration of his aftereffects of the Pre-Law and Inter-Law examination that the University brought up the criticism regarding his supposed ineligibility to be conceded to the Law course.
  • The University is, thus, unmistakably estopped from declining to announce the consequences of the appellant’s examination or from keeping him from seeking after his last year course.
  • The court said that the University isn’t defended in declining to proclaim the appellant’s consequences of the Pre-Law and Intermediate Law examinations.
  • The appeal, along these lines, succeeds. The respondent-University is coordinated to declare the said results just as the consequence of the Final examination if the appellant has shown up for the equivalent. The appeal is permitted as needs be.

CONCLUSION

  • For this load of reasons, the court was of the view that the University was not advocated for declining to pronounce the appellant’s aftereffects of the Pre-Law and Intermediate Law examinations.
  • The appeal, hence, succeeded. The respondent-University was coordinated to proclaim the said results just as the aftereffect of the last examination if the appellant has shown up for the equivalent.
  • The appeal was permitted as needs be. In the circumstances of the case, there was no structure as to costs.

Found Sanatan Gauda vs. Berhampur University case summary useful? We have a bunch of useful topics from Evidence law that will help you in your preparation here >>> EVIDENCE ACT

Check out our YouTube Channel for free legal videos >>> LAW PLANET YT

Share on print
Print PDF
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on email
Email
Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Ankit Kumar

Ankit Kumar

See Legal News, Judgements, Jobs Monthwise

Recent Posts

About Us

Law Planet is specially created for law enthusiasts. We provide courses for various law exams. We also write about law to increase legal awareness amongst common citizens.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR BLOG!