[Answered] Evaluate the impact of the Supreme Court’s exercise of curative jurisdiction on the perception of judicial finality and stability. How does this practice affect the legal and business environment in India?

The Supreme Court of India’s curative jurisdiction, the power to revisit its own final judgments, presents a complex issue. While intended to address grave injustices, it can undermine the concept of judicial finality, impacting the legal and business environment. The recent case of Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (“DMRC”) vs Delhi Airport Metro Express Pvt Ltd (“DAMEPL”) demonstrates that curative jurisdiction raises concern about SC power.

Impact on Judicial Finality and Stability

• Erosion of Finality: Reopening final judgements creates uncertainty and weakens the concept of finality, a cornerstone of a robust legal system.
• Litigation Delays: The possibility of curative petitions can lead to prolonged litigation, hindering business activities that rely on swift legal resolution.
• Unpredictability: Businesses require a predictable legal environment to make informed decisions. Curative jurisdiction can introduce uncertainty into judicial outcomes.
• Strained Judicial Resources: Curative petitions add to the already overburdened Supreme Court, delaying other cases.

Effects on the Legal and Business Environment

• Legal Environment: The process of filing and adjudicating curative petitions adds complexity to legal proceedings, potentially delaying the resolution of disputes and increasing litigation costs. Moreover, the subjective nature of curative jurisdiction raises concerns about consistency and predictability in judicial decision-making, which can impact legal certainty.
• Business Environment: In the business context, the uncertainty introduced by curative jurisdiction can have implications for investment decisions and commercial transactions. Businesses rely on the stability and predictability of legal frameworks to assess risks and make informed choices. The possibility of revisiting final judgments through curative petitions introduces a level of unpredictability that may deter investment and undermine confidence in the Indian legal system. Furthermore, prolonged legal disputes resulting from curative petitions can disrupt business operations, leading to financial losses and reputational damage.

Conclusion

Curative jurisdiction presents a dilemma for the Indian judicial system. While it serves the purpose of correcting grave injustices, it can come at the cost of judicial finality and stability, impacting the legal and business environment. Finding a balance through stricter criteria, time limits, and promoting alternative dispute resolution mechanisms is crucial for a robust and predictable legal system that fosters business activity.