Curative Jurisdiction: Sounding the gavel on curative jurisdiction

Source: The post Curative Jurisdiction has been created, based on the article “Sounding the gavel on curative jurisdiction” published in “The Hindu” on 27th April 2024.

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper 2 – Polity – Supreme Court

News: The article discusses the Supreme Court of India’s use of “Curative Jurisdiction” to overturn a previous decision it made regarding an arbitral award. This is controversial because it reflects a shift from the court’s usual stance of minimal interference in arbitration cases.

What is Curative Jurisdiction?

Introduction in 2002: Curative Jurisdiction was introduced by the Supreme Court of India in 2002 to ensure that injustices in its final judgments can be corrected.

Different from Review: It goes beyond typical review mechanisms, which primarily address apparent errors on the record, by allowing for the reconsideration of final decisions if they result in gross miscarriage of justice.

Example: In the 2024 case of DMRC vs. DAMEPL, the Court used its Curative Jurisdiction to overturn an earlier decision which had upheld an arbitral award, thus demonstrating its commitment to justice over strict adherence to past judgments.

For more details on DMRC vs. DAMEPL case read here

Enhances Judicial Integrity: By admitting and correcting its errors, the Court upholds judicial integrity and adapts to evolving legal standards and societal values.

What are the Problems with Curative Jurisdiction?

Undermines Finality: Curative Jurisdiction challenges the principle of finality in legal judgments. Frequent reversals could erode confidence in the Supreme Court’s decisions.

Potential for Overuse: There’s a risk of this power being overused, leading to instability in the legal system as decisions could be perpetually open to challenge.

Impact on Judicial Consistency: The case of DMRC vs. DAMEPL in 2024 illustrates how Curative Jurisdiction can lead to inconsistencies. Initially, the Supreme Court supported minimal interference with arbitration awards, but reversed this stance dramatically in the curative petition.

Questioning Precedents: By overturning its own decisions, the Court risks creating an uncertain legal environment, where past judgments are viewed as potentially reversible, not as stable precedents.

Question for practice:

Discuss the implications of the Supreme Court of India’s use of Curative Jurisdiction on judicial integrity, legal consistency, and the principle of finality in legal judgments, using the case of DMRC vs. DAMEPL as an example.