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

1994 Supreme(Kar) 333

M.F.SALDANHA
M. M. NIRMALA – Appellant
Versus
NEW MANGALORE PORT TRUST, BY ITS SECRETARY, MANGALORE – Respondent


Advocates:
VIJAYASHANKAR ASSOCIATES

M. F. SALDANHA, J.

( 1 ) A point of procedure has been raised by the respondents'learned Counsel which concerns the conduct of writ petitions in this High Court. Under the scheme prevalent as of now, which is evolved as a matter of practice and which is in keeping with the rules framed by the High Court for the conduct of writ petitions, the Court often orders notice to the respondents at the initial stage of hearing of the Petition. This is obviously with the intention of hearing the other side even on the question of issue of Rule Nisi but more importantly, for purposes of ascertaining whether the matter can be disposed of at that stage itself without going into the procedure of formally admitting the petition and setting it down for hearing. This is basically governed by the objective of expediency because the High Court has taken serious notice of the mounting arrears and of the fact that a relief granted at a belated stage may hardly provide succour to the aggrieved litigant. Moreover, there is a whole class of cases wherein timely Justice can be dispensed after a quick assessment of the dispute' and tedious formalities of filing lengthy pleadings etc. , can be curtailed. There








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