[Type here]

Name : Aniket Dayani

Semester : 9th

Roll No : 10

Topic : THE CLAUSE OF NOTWITHSTANDING

Teacher : Dr. Adhara Deshpande

College : RTMNU’s Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar College of Law

1|Page
[Type here]

THE CLAUSE OF NOTWITHSTANDING

"However,". every now and then a section begins with the words "however anything
contained in this Act". once in a while the hole phrases of a segment are "notwithstanding
something contained in any regulation in the mean time in pressure". The statutory provisions
using those phrases are termed as "Non Obstante Clause".

Presence of non obstante clause is determined in nearly all of the statutes. Out of many
examples, one might be enough to give an explanation for. phase 24-A of customer protection
Act, 1986 which presents the drawback period and reads as beneath.

"(1) The District forum, the state commission and the country wide fee shall now not admit a
criticism unless it is filed within two years from the date on which the purpose of action has
arisen however something contained in sub-section (1), a criticism may be entertained after
the period specified in sub-section (1), if the complainant satisfies the District forum, the
country commission or the country wide commission, as the case may be, that he had enough
cause for no longer submitting the complaint inside such period: provided that no such
complaint will be entertained except the national commission, the state fee or the District
forum, because the case may be, facts its motive for condoning such delay". it may be
preferred that sub-segment (2) starts with the expression "however some thing contained in
sub-phase (1)" and as such it's far a non obstante clause. It says that anything is supplied in
sub-segment (1) shall not have effect if the complainant convinces the District discussion
board, the kingdom fee or the country wide commission approximately sufficiency of reasons
for no longer submitting the complaint inside the length of years stipulated by using sub-
section (1). consequently the non obstante provision under sub-segment (2) shall enjoy
overriding effect at the provision unique within the language, i.e., sub-phase (1).

The cause in the back of appending such clauses is to provide enacting a part of the segment,
in case of a battle, an overriding effect over the provisions or Act cited in non obstante
clause. It means that other provisions shall now not succeed over the main provision. The non

2|Page
[Type here]

obstante provision shall be successful over another provision and the alternative provision
will be of no consequence. but, in spite of provision below non obstante, the enactment may
have full operation.

In Chandavarkar Sita Ratna Rao v. Ashalata S. Guram,' the Apex court found that a clause
starting with the expression "notwithstanding whatever contained in this Act or in some
specific provision inside the Act or in some precise Act or in any law in the mean time in
force, or in any contract" is extra often than not appended to a phase inside the starting on the
way to give the enacting a part of the section in case of warfare an overriding effect over the
supply of the Act or the contract stated inside the non obstante clause. it's far equal to
pronouncing that during spite of the provision of the Act or every other Act mentioned in the
non obstante clause or any contract or file noted the enactment following it will have its full
operation or that the provisions embraced in the non obstante clause might now not be an
impediment for an operation of the enactment.

In Aswini Kumar Ghosh and every other v. Arabinda Bose,2 it was found that it have to first
be ascertained what the enacting a part of the section presents on a truthful creation of the
phrases used consistent with their herbal and everyday meaning, and the non obstante clause
is to be understood as running to set aside as not valid something contained in relevant
current legal guidelines which is inconsistent with the new enactment..... Nor are we able to
read the non obstante clause as specifically repealing only the unique provisions which the
learned Judges below have been at pains to select out from the Bar Councils Act and the
unique aspect guidelines of the Calcutta and Bombay excessive Courts. If, as we've

(2) however something contained in sub-segment (1), a criticism can be entertained after the
length laid out in sub-section (1), if the complainant satisfies the District discussion board,
the nation fee or the national fee, as the case may be, that he had sufficient motive

for not submitting the grievance inside such length: furnished that no such grievance will be
entertained unless the countrywide fee, the country commission or the District forum,
because the

3|Page
[Type here]

case can be, records its cause for condoning such delay". it may be favored that sub-segment
(2) starts with the expression "notwithstanding some thing contained in sub-section (1)" and
as such it is a non obstante clause. It says that anything is furnished in sub-phase (1) shall
now not have effect if the complainant convinces the District forum, the nation commission
or the countrywide fee about sufficiency of reasons for now not submitting the grievance
inside the period of years stipulated by means of sub-section (1). thus the non obstante
provision under sub-section (2) shall revel in overriding effect at the provision unique in the
language, i.e., sub-section (1).

The motive in the back of appending such clauses is to give enacting part of the phase, in
case of a struggle, an overriding effect over the provisions or Act referred to in non obstante
clause. It implies that different provisions shall not prevail over the primary provision. The
non obstante provision shall succeed over another provision and the opposite provision shall
be of no effect. but, notwithstanding provision below non obstante, the enactment can have
complete operation.

In Chandavarkar Sita Ratna Rao v. Ashalata S. Guram,' the Apex court docket observed that
a clause starting with the expression "however some thing contained in this Act or in some
particular provision inside the Act or in some specific Act or in any regulation in the mean
time in pressure, or in any settlement" is extra frequently than now not appended to a segment
in the starting with a view to supply the enacting a part of the section in case of conflict an
overriding impact over the availability of the Act or the settlement stated in the non obstante
clause. it's far equivalent to announcing that in spite of the availability of the Act or another
Act mentioned within the non obstante clause or any agreement or document referred to the
enactment following it's going to have its complete operation or that the provisions embraced
in the non obstante clause could no longer be an impediment for an operation of the
enactment.

In Aswini Kumar Ghosh and another v. Arabinda Bose,2 it turned into determined that it
need to first be ascertained what the enacting a part of the segment provides on a fair

4|Page
[Type here]

production of the phrases used in step with their herbal and everyday that means, and the non
obstante clause is to be understood as working to set aside as no longer legitimate some thing
contained in applicable present laws that's inconsistent with the new enactment..... Nor can
we examine the non obstante clause as specifically repealing only the precise provisions
which the learned Judges below had been at pains to pick out out from the Bar Councils Act
and the unique aspect rules of the Calcutta and Bombay high Courts. in that clause. it's far
equal to pronouncing that during spite of the provision or Act cited within the non obstante
clause, the enactment following it's going to have its full operation or that the supply
indicated within the non obstante clause will not be an obstacle for the operation of the
enactment. In T.D. Benny v. Registrar, Cooperative Societies,' at the same time as
interpreting

Rule 187 of Kerala Cooperative provider regulations, 1969, it was held that whena unique
provision in a statute begins with a non obstante to the impact "however anything contained",
the idea is plain that the supply embraced in non obstante clause will not be an impediment
for operation of the enactment.

In state (NCT of Delhi) v. Sanjay, the Apex court, even as announcing on Ss. 21, 22 and 4(1-
A) of Mines and Minerals (development and regulation) Act, 1957, explained the which
means of non-obstante clause. It was held that the non obstante clause is a legislative tool to
provide

impact to certain provisions over some opposite provisions that can be found both in
identical enactment or a few other enactment In Indra Kumar Patodia v. Reliance Industries
Ltd.,3 the ultimate courtroom explained the effect of non-obstante clause, when such clause
does no longer confer with any precise provision it intends to override however refers to
provisions of the statute typically. It was held that such non-obstante clause does no longer
exclude the complete Act nor stands all on my own via itself. There calls for to be a
determination as to which provision solutions the description and which does now not. The
court is needed to discover extent to which the legislature supposed to accomplish that and
context wherein the non obstante clause is used. In kingdom (NCT of Delhi) v. Narender, the
significance of non obstante clause became reiterated. It changed into held that it is a
legislative device to present effect to enacting a part of phase in case of war over provisions

5|Page
[Type here]

noted in non obstante clause. In Shivram Dodanna Shetty v. Sharmila Shivram Shetty," the
total Bench held that a non obstante clause must receive effect to the volume Parliament
intended and now not past the equal. it is able to be used as a legislative tool to modify the
scope of provision or regulation referred to in the said clause. The non obstante clause would
throw some mild as to the scope and ambit of the enacting part in case of its ambiguity. but if
the enacting element is clear, its scope can not be reduce down or enlarged through resorting
to non obstante clause.

6|Page