SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 836

A.S.ANAND, S.B.MAJMUDAR
Fauja Singh – Appellant
Versus
Jaspal Kaur – Respondent


ORDER

Leave granted.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the record.

2. The appellant had raised a specific plea in the executing court regarding the non-attachability of his residential house in view of the provisions of Section 60(ccc) C.P.C. The executing court has not dealt with the issue and the High Court, also did not deal with that question and dismissed the civil revision petition by one word "dismissed". In our opinion, since the parties were present before the High Court in the civil revision, on the plainest consideration of justice, it should have assigned reasons for dismissing the civil revision petition against the order of the executing court. The absence of reasons had deprived this court to know the circumstances which weighed with the High Court to dismiss the revision petition in limine. We say it with respect, that it was an unsatisfactory method of disposal of the revision petition. The necessity to provide reasons, howsoever, brief in support of its conclusion is too obvious to be reiterated. Obligation to give reasons introduces clarity and excludes, or at any rate minimises the chances of arbitrariness and the higher forum can test






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top