An intra court appeal did involve factual and legal issues, which were decided by the Single Judge, therefore, once they were carried in intra court appeal by an aggrieved party and pressed in service while assailing the order of the Single Judge, it was incumbent upon the Division Bench to deal with all the issues urged and record its findings one way or the other on every issue urged keeping in view the legal provisions applicable to the issues.
DATE: October 26, 2018
SUPREME COURT OF INDIAIndia Bharat Varsha (Jambu Dvipa) is the name of this land mass. The people of this land are Sanatan Dharmin and they always defeated invaders. Indra (10000 yrs) was the oldest deified King of this land. Manu's jurisprudence enlitened this land. Vedas have been the civilizational literature of this land. Guiding principles of this land are : सत्यं वद । धर्मं चर । स्वाध्यायान्मा प्रमदः । Read more
[Civil Appeal No.10781 of 2018 arising out of SLP(C) No. 26294 of 2018]
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is directed against the final judgmentJudgment The statement given by the Judge on the grounds of a decree or order - CPC 2(9). It contains a concise statement of the case, points for determination, the decision thereon, and the reasons for such decision - Order 20 Rule 4(2). Section 354 of CrPC requires that every judgment shall contain points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision. Indian Supreme Court Decisions > Law declared by Supreme Court to be binding on all courts (Art 141 Indian Constitution) Civil and judicial authorities to act in aid of the Supreme Court (Art 144) Supreme Court Network On Judiciary – Portal > Denning: “Judges do not speak, as do actors, to please. They do not speak, as do advocates, to persuade. They do not speak, as do historians, to recount the past. They speak to give Judgment. And in their judgments, you will find passages, which are worthy to rank with the greatest literature….” Law Points on Judgment Writing > The judge must write to provide an easy-to-understand analysis of the issues of law and fact which arise for decision. Judgments are primarily meant for those whose cases are decided by judges (State Bank of India and Another Vs Ajay Kumar Sood SC 2022) and order dated 04.12.2017 of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1598 of 2017 whereby the High Court disposed of the same filed by the appellant upholding the final order and judgment dated 04.09.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge.
3. Few facts need to be mentioned infra for the disposal of this appeal, which involves a short point.
4. The dispute, which is subject matter of this appeal, relates to acquisition of land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act (for short called The Act).
5. The challenge was made by the appellant (writ petitioner) by filing the writ petition in the High Court to the issuance of Section 4 notifications and subsequent notifications issued under the Act on several factual and legal grounds.
6. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, which gave rise to filing of the intra court appeal by the writ petitioner before the Division Bench. By impugned order, the Division Bench dismissed the appeal and upheld the order passed by the learned Single judge, which has given rise to filing of special leave to appeal in this Court.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we are constrained to allow the appeal and while setting aside the impugned order remand the intra court appeal to the Division Bench of the High Court for its disposal afresh on meritsMerits Strict legal rights of the parties; a decision “on the merits” is one that reaches the right(s) of a party as distinguished from a disposition of the case on a ground not reaching the rights raised in the action; for example, in a criminal case double jeopardy does not apply if charges are nolle prossed before trial commences, and in a civil action res judicata does not apply if a previous action was dismissed on a preliminary motion raising a technicality such as improper service of process. in accordance with law.
8. In our considered view, the need to remand the appeal to the Division Bench for its decision afresh on merits has occasioned inter alia for the reason that it did not deal with any of the issues arising in the case and nor it seemed to have dealt with any of the submissions urged by the parties and, especially, the submissions urged by the appellant.
9. In our considered opinionOpinion A judge's written explanation of a decision of the court. In an appeal, multiple opinions may be written. The court’s ruling comes from a majority of judges and forms the majority opinion. A dissenting opinion disagrees with the majority because of the reasoning and/or the principles of law on which the decision is based. A concurring opinion agrees with the end result of the court but offers further comment possibly because they disagree with how the court reached its conclusion., the intra court appeal did involve factual and legal issues, which were decided by the Single Judge, therefore, once they were carried in intra court appeal by an aggrieved party and pressed in service while assailing the order of the Single Judge, it was incumbent upon the Division Bench to deal with all the issues urged and record its findings one way or the other on every issue urged keeping in view the legal provisions applicable to the issues.
10. It was, however, not done by the Division Bench and in a cursory manner, the Division Bench disposed of the appeal, resulting in its dismissal.
11. We find ourselves unable to concur with such disposal and feel inclined to set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the Division Bench of the High Court with a request to decide the appeal afresh on merits in accordance with law.
12. Having formed an opinion to remand the case in the light of our reasoning mentioned above, we do not consider it proper to go into the merits of the case and, therefore, leave all the issues to be dealt with by the Division Bench for its decision on merits.
13. In view of the foregoing discussion, the appeal succeeds and is accordingly allowed. Impugned order is set aside. The case (intra court appeal) is remanded to the Division Bench of the High Court for its decision on merits uninfluenced by any of our observations in this order. We request the High Court to dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible preferably within 6 months.
14. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
J. [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE]
J. [INDU MALHOTRA]
New Delhi,
October 26, 2018.