{"id":117223,"date":"1991-02-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1991-02-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991"},"modified":"2016-03-14T03:17:51","modified_gmt":"2016-03-13T21:47:51","slug":"emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991","title":{"rendered":"Emc Steel Limited, Calcutta vs Union Of India And Anr on 13 February, 1991"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Emc Steel Limited, Calcutta vs Union Of India And Anr on 13 February, 1991<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1991 SCR  (1) 381, \t  1991 SCC  (2) 101<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: P Sawant<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Sawant, P.B.<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nEMC STEEL LIMITED, CALCUTTA\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT13\/02\/1991\n\nBENCH:\nSAWANT, P.B.\nBENCH:\nSAWANT, P.B.\nSHETTY, K.J. (J)\nSHARMA, L.M. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1991 SCR  (1) 381\t  1991 SCC  (2) 101\n JT 1991 (1)   447\t  1991 SCALE  (1)206\n\n\nACT:\n     Delhi  Rent Control Act, 1958:  Section  14D-Landlady-A\nwidow's right to seek eviction of tenant for own residence.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n     This appeal has been filed against the judgment of\t the\nDelhi  High  Court whereby the High Court  gave\t the  widow-\nlandlady  the  benefit\tof  section 14-D of the Delhi\tRent\nControl\t  Act,\t 1958\tand   accordingly  granted  her\t the\nPossession of the premises in question.\n     Before this Court it was inter alia contended on behalf\nof   the  appellant that the relief under section  14-D\t was\navailable  only to a landlady who had become a\tWidow  after\nthe premises were let out either by herself or her  husband.\nit  was\t further  contended that if  the  benefit  given  by\nsection\t 14-D was allowed to be availed by all widows,\tthey\nmay make a business of it.\n     Dismissing the appeal, this Court,\n     HELD:  (1) The legislature\t w anted to give  a  special\nprivilege  to  the landlady who is a  widow  notwithstanding\nwhether\t the  Premises\twere  let out before  or  after\t she\nbecame widow. Such conferment of special benefit on a  widow\nlandlady is permissible even under the provisions of Article\n15(3)  of the Constitution which is an express exception  to\nthe provisions of sub-clauses (1) and (2) of that Article. A\nwidow is undoubtedly a vulnerable person in our society\t and\nrequires special protection. [383H-384B]\n     (2)  Section 14-D can be availed of by the\t widow\tonly\nonce.  That is a sufficient guarantee against the  abuse  of\nthe  privilege granted by the section. Secondly, she has  to\nprove her bona fide need for the occupation of the  Premises\nin  question for her own residence like any other  landlord.\nThirdly,  the  provisions of section 19 of  the\t Delhi\tRent\nControl\t Act come to play in her case also, when  the  order\nfor  possession on the ground of bona fide  requirement\t for\noccupation as residence is made in her favour. [384C]\n\t\t\t\t\t\t       382\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>     <a href=\"\/doc\/846318\/\">Dr.  P.  P. Kapur v. Union of India &amp; Ors.\t Delhi\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt, Civil Writ No.<\/a> 2686 of 1989 overruled.\n<\/p>\n<p>     CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 710  of<br \/>\n1991.\n<\/p>\n<p>     From  the\tJudgment  and Order dated  8.5.1990  of\t the<br \/>\nDelhi  High Court in Civil Writ No. 3257 of 1989.\n<\/p>\n<p>     G.L. Sanghi, Harish N. Salve, H.K. Puri, Rajeev Sharma,<br \/>\nRavinder  Nath, V.B. Saharya, P.K. Jain and  Prem   Malhotra<br \/>\nfor  the Appellants.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Y.S. Chitale, T.S. Krishnamurthy Iyer, R.L. Jain,\tS.K.<br \/>\nTredal, Kitty  Kumarmanglam,  R.P.  Dave  and  Ashok  Mathur<br \/>\nfor  the  Respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\n     SAWANT, J. SLP (C) No. 12 1 11 of 1990.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Leave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>     2. This appeal raises the question of the validity\t and<br \/>\ninterpretation\tof  Section 14-D of the Delhi  Rent  Control<br \/>\nAct,  1958  (hereinafter  referred  to\tas  the\t &#8220;Act&#8221;).  In<br \/>\ncompanion  matters,  we\t have  already pronounced  upon\t the<br \/>\nvalidity  and  interpretation of Section 14-B  of  the\tAct.<br \/>\nHence,\tit is not necessary to discuss in this judgment\t the<br \/>\npoints which are common to both sections. These points\twill<br \/>\nbe  deemed  to have been concluded by the said decision.\n<\/p>\n<p>     3. The only point which remains to be dealt with and is<br \/>\npeculiar  to Section 14-D is whether to claim possession  of<br \/>\nsuch  premises\tunder the said Section,\t the  landlady\tmust<br \/>\nbecome\ta  widow after the premises are let  out  either  by<br \/>\nherself or her husband.\n<\/p>\n<p>     4.\t Section 14-D of the Act reads as follows:<br \/>\n\t  &#8220;14-D.  Right to recover immediate possession\t  of<br \/>\n\t  premises  to\taccrue\tto  a  widow-(1)  Where\t the<br \/>\n\t  landlord  is a widow and the premises let  out  by<br \/>\n\t  her (2) or by her husband, are required by her for<br \/>\n\t  her own residence, she may apply to the Controller<br \/>\n\t  for  recovering the immediate possession  of\tsuch<br \/>\n\t  premises.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">\t\t\t\t\t\t       383<\/span><\/p>\n<p>\t  (2) Where the landlord referred to in\t sub-section<br \/>\n\t  (1)  has let out more than one premises, it  shall<br \/>\n\t  be  open to her to make an application under\tthat<br \/>\n\t  sub-section  in   respect   of  any  one  of\t the<br \/>\n\t  premises chosen by her.\n<\/p>\n<p>     5. The object of the Act, as stated in its preamble, is<br \/>\nto  provide for the control of rents and evictions,  and  of<br \/>\nrates  of  hotels and lodging houses, and for the  lease  of<br \/>\nvacant premises to Government, in certain areas in the Union<br \/>\nTerritory  of  Delhi. The original Act came  into  force  on<br \/>\nFebruary   9,  1959  having  received  the  assent  of\t the<br \/>\nPresident   on December\t 31,  1958.  The  working   of\t the<br \/>\nAct   disclosed\t  certain deficiencies,\t inconveniences\t and<br \/>\nhardships  both to  the\t landlords  and the  tenants.  Their<br \/>\nassociations,  therefore,  made\t representations.    Various<br \/>\ncommittees  and\t commissions  also  recommended\t  amendments<br \/>\nof certain provisions of the Act. Considering the grievances<br \/>\nof   the   landlords  and  the\ttenants\t as  well   as\t the<br \/>\nrecommendations of the\tcommittees\/commissions, the Act\t was<br \/>\namended in 1988 with the object of (a) rationalising the law<br \/>\nby  bringing  out  the balance\tbetween\t the   interests  of<br \/>\nlandlords and tenants, (b) giving a boost to house  building<br \/>\nactivity  and  maintaining the existing housing stock  in  a<br \/>\nreasonable   state   of\t repairs,  (c)\treducing  litigation<br \/>\nbetween landlords and tenants and  of ensuring\t expeditious<br \/>\ndisposal   of  disputes\t between  them.\t By  this  amendment<br \/>\nSections 14-B to 14-D were added.  The\tobject\tof   Section<br \/>\n14-D  is  obvious. It is to assist a  vulnerable  and  needy<br \/>\nsection of the Society to recover possession of the premises<br \/>\nas  expeditiously as Possible and without the  usual  trials<br \/>\nand tribulations.\n<\/p>\n<p>     6.\t We  have  already   held   in\t the\taccompanying<br \/>\njudgment   that\t classified  landlords\tsuch  as  the  widow<br \/>\nlandlady under Section 14-D can apply for possession of\t the<br \/>\npremises  under\t the  respective   provisions  even  if\t the<br \/>\npremises  are not let for residence. It is not necessary  to<br \/>\nrepeat\tthe said discussion in this judgment.  Section\t14-D<br \/>\nmakes  no distinction between  the  landladies\twho   become<br \/>\nwidows\t before\t and after letting out of the  premises.  It<br \/>\nmerely\tsays  that  where the landlady is a  widow  and\t the<br \/>\npremises are let out by her or by her- husband, are required<br \/>\nby  her\t for  her  own\tresidence,  she\t may  apply  to\t the<br \/>\nController  for\t recovering  the  immediate  possession\t  of<br \/>\nsuch  premises.\t The language of the section in that respect<br \/>\nis  very clear. The premises might have been let out by\t her<br \/>\nas a widow or they might have been let out by her husband or<br \/>\neven  by  herself  before  she\t had   become\twidow.\t The<br \/>\nlegislature  wanted  to\t give a\t special  privilege  to\t the<br \/>\nlandlady who is a widow notwithstanding whether the premises<br \/>\nwere   let   out  before  or after she\tbecame\twidow.\tSuch<br \/>\nconferment of special benefit on a<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">\t\t\t\t\t\t       384<\/span><br \/>\nwidow-landlady\tis permissible even under the provisions  of<br \/>\nArticle\t 15(3)\tof  the Constitution  which  is\t an  express<br \/>\nexception  to the provisions of sub-clauses (1) and  (2)  of<br \/>\nthat  Article.\tIt states that nothing in the  said  Article<br \/>\nshall  prevent the State from making any  special  provision<br \/>\nfor women and children.\t A widow is undoubtedly a vulnerable<br \/>\nperson\tin our society and requires special protection.\t  We<br \/>\nfurther\t see no merit in the contention that if the  benefit<br \/>\ngiven by Section 14-D is allowed to be availed of by widows,<br \/>\nthey  may  make a business of it.  There is no\twarrant\t for<br \/>\nsuch apprehension.  For, in the first instance, the right to<br \/>\nrecover\t possession under Section 14-D can be availed of  by<br \/>\nthe widow only once. That is a sufficient guarantee  against<br \/>\nthe   abuse  of\t the  privilege\t granted  by  the   section.<br \/>\nSecondly,  she\thas  to prove her bona\tfide  need  for\t the<br \/>\noccupation of the premises in question for her own residence<br \/>\nlike any other landlord.  Thirdly, the provisions of Section<br \/>\n19  of\tthe Act come into play in her case  also,  when\t the<br \/>\norder for possession on the ground of bona fide\t requirement<br \/>\nfor occupation as residence is made in her favour.\n<\/p>\n<p>     In\t this  view of the matter, we find no  substance  in<br \/>\nthis  appeal and the same is dismissed with no order  as  to<br \/>\ncosts.\n<\/p>\n<p>Writ Petition No. 902 of 1990\n<\/p>\n<p>     7.\t   In the view that we have taken above, it  is\t not<br \/>\nnecessary  to  admit this writ\tpetition.   The\t authorities<br \/>\nunder  the  Act while disposing of  the\t applications  under<br \/>\nSection 14-D will have to abide by this decision and not  by<br \/>\nthe decision of the Delhi High Court in Civil Writ No.\t2686<br \/>\nof 1989 in the matter of <a href=\"\/doc\/846318\/\">Dr. P.P. Kapur v. Union of India  &amp;<br \/>\nOrs.<\/a> which was brought to our notice and stands overruled.\n<\/p>\n<pre>R.S.S.\t\t\t\t\t    Appeal dismissed.\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">\t\t\t\t\t\t      385<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Emc Steel Limited, Calcutta vs Union Of India And Anr on 13 February, 1991 Equivalent citations: 1991 SCR (1) 381, 1991 SCC (2) 101 Author: P Sawant Bench: Sawant, P.B. PETITIONER: EMC STEEL LIMITED, CALCUTTA Vs. RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT13\/02\/1991 BENCH: SAWANT, P.B. BENCH: SAWANT, P.B. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-117223","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Emc Steel Limited, Calcutta vs Union Of India And Anr on 13 February, 1991 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Emc Steel Limited, Calcutta vs Union Of India And Anr on 13 February, 1991 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1991-02-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-03-13T21:47:51+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Emc Steel Limited, Calcutta vs Union Of India And Anr on 13 February, 1991\",\"datePublished\":\"1991-02-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-13T21:47:51+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991\"},\"wordCount\":1076,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991\",\"name\":\"Emc Steel Limited, Calcutta vs Union Of India And Anr on 13 February, 1991 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1991-02-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-13T21:47:51+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Emc Steel Limited, Calcutta vs Union Of India And Anr on 13 February, 1991\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Emc Steel Limited, Calcutta vs Union Of India And Anr on 13 February, 1991 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Emc Steel Limited, Calcutta vs Union Of India And Anr on 13 February, 1991 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1991-02-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-03-13T21:47:51+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Emc Steel Limited, Calcutta vs Union Of India And Anr on 13 February, 1991","datePublished":"1991-02-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-13T21:47:51+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991"},"wordCount":1076,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991","name":"Emc Steel Limited, Calcutta vs Union Of India And Anr on 13 February, 1991 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1991-02-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-13T21:47:51+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emc-steel-limited-calcutta-vs-union-of-india-and-anr-on-13-february-1991#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Emc Steel Limited, Calcutta vs Union Of India And Anr on 13 February, 1991"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/117223","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=117223"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/117223\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=117223"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=117223"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=117223"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}