Supreme Court

Kushuma Devi Vs. Sheopati Devi (D) and Ors.

MANU/SC/0490/2019

08.04.2019

Civil

Every judicial or quasi-judicial order passed by Court must be supported with reasons in support of its conclusion

The Appellant filed an eviction petition against the Respondents. By order, the Civil Judge decreed the suit and passed the decree for eviction against the Respondents. The Respondents felt aggrieved and filed Rent Appeal. The first Appellate Court by order allowed the appeal and dismissed the eviction petition filed by the Appellant. By impugned order, the High Court dismissed the writ petition and affirmed the order passed by the Additional District Judge, in the absence of the Appellant. The Appellant filed an application for recall of the order. The High Court by order dismissed the said application. Issue raised in present case is whether High Court was justified in simply dismissing the writ petition without assigning any reason.

Present Court has consistently laid down that, every judicial or/and quasi-judicial order passed by the Court/Tribunal/Authority concerned, which decides the lis between the parties, must be supported with the reasons in support of its conclusion. The parties to the lis and so also the appellate/revisionary Court while examining the correctness of the order are entitled to know as to on which basis, a particular conclusion is arrived at in the order. In the absence of any discussion, the reasons and the findings on the submissions urged, it is not possible to know as to what led the Court/Tribunal/Authority for reaching to such conclusion.

The orders impugned in present appeals suffer from error as the High Court while passing the impugned order simply dismissed the writ petition without any discussion, finding and the reason. The impugned orders are set aside. The case is remanded to the High Court for deciding the writ petition afresh. Appeal allowed.

Tags : Judicial order Reasoning Absence

Share :