Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. GAVAI, K.V. VISWANATHAN, JJ.
Shivaji – Appellant
VERSUS
Parwatibai & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No(s). 13248 of 2024 @ SLP(C) No. 12996 of 2022
Decided On : 26-11-2024
JUDGMENT
B.R. GAVAI, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal deserves to be allowed on the short ground that the second appeal, wherein the present appellant was Respondent No.2, was decided even without giving notice to the appellant herein.
3. Shri Atul Babasaheb Dakh, learned counsel further submits that even the questions of law which were framed by the learned Trial Judge were framed during the dictation of the order and the appellant herein did not have an opportunity of being heard.
4. Such a practice by the High Court is deprecated by a recent judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Suresh Lataruji Ramteke v. Sau. Sumanbai Pandurang Petkar and Others, reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1210 : 2023 8 Supreme 194.
5. The impugned order is, therefore, set aside and the matter is remitted back to the High Court for deciding it afresh in accordance with law.
6. Since the appeal arises out of a suit filed in the year 2009, we request the High Court to decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably within a period of one year from today.
7. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed.
8. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
The court emphasized the necessity of providing notice and an opportunity to be heard, reaffirming the importance of natural justice in judicial proceedings.
Judicial decisions must be timely and reasoned to maintain the integrity of the judiciary and ensure that justice is not only done but seen to be done.
The necessity of evaluating applicable facts and legal principles when similar prior decisions affect ongoing appeals.
(1) Setting aside ex-parte decree – Delay of seven years in filing recall application cannot be condoned.(2) Vigilance and diligence go hand-in-hand, making them two sides of same coin, when it comes....
The Court mandates expeditious consideration of pending appeals ensuring the right to be heard.
The signed and uploaded order is the final operative judgment; draft dictation to court-master is subject to permissible corrections before signing, with only material changes requiring rehearing (36....
The High Court should not entertain a revision petition under Article 227 against an ex-parte judgment and decree when a specific remedy of appeal is available under the Code of Civil Procedure itsel....
(1) Letters Patent Appeal – Word ‘judgment’ has a concept of finality in a broader and not in a narrower sense--Where an order vitally affects a valuable right of defendants, it will be treated as a ....
The primary prayer in both recall applications was substantially the recall of the order dated December 6, 2018, and the Court rejected the second recall application on the ground of constructive res....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
