Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
Top Stories

Pass Reasoned Judgment Along With Operative Order: Supreme Court Criticizes NCDRC Practice Of Passing 'Reasons To Follow' Orders

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
19 Feb 2021 10:05 AM GMT
Pass Reasoned Judgment Along With Operative Order: Supreme Court Criticizes NCDRC Practice Of Passing Reasons To Follow Orders
x

The Supreme Court, criticizing the practice of 'reasons to follow' orders, directed the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to pass reasoned Judgment along with the operative order.The bench comprising Justices Indu Malhotra and Ajay Rastogi observed that, in all matters before NCDRC where reasons are yet to be delivered, it must be ensured that the same are made available to...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
599+GST
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

The Supreme Court, criticizing the practice of 'reasons to follow' orders, directed the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to pass reasoned Judgment along with the operative order.

The bench comprising Justices Indu Malhotra and Ajay Rastogi observed that, in all matters before NCDRC where reasons are yet to be delivered, it must be ensured that the same are made available to the litigating parties positively within a period of two months.

"Undisputedly, the rights of the aggrieved parties are being prejudiced if the reasons are not available to them to avail of the legal remedy of approaching the Court where the reasons can be scrutinized. It indeed amounts to defeating the rights of the party aggrieved to challenge the impugned judgment on merits and even the succeeding party is unable to obtain the fruits of success of the litigation.", the bench observed while noticing that, in the instant case, the operative order was pronounced on 26.04.2019, and in the reasoned judgment was made available after eight months.

The court noted a recent order passed in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Zaixhu Xie & Ors. in which it was observed that the delay in delivery of judgments is a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the problems gets aggravated when the operative portion is made available early, and the reasons follow much later, or are not made available for an indefinite period.

Taking note of the report submitted by Registrar of NCDRC, the bench noted that, as on 20.12.2019, there were 85 such cases in which the operative order had been pronounced, but reasoned judgments were not delivered so far. "The fact which has been brought to our notice by the Registrar of the Commission can, in no manner, be countenanced that between the date of operative portion of the order and the reasons are yet to be provided, or the hiatus period is much more than what has been observed to be the maximum time period for even pronouncement of reserved judgments", the court said.

CASE: Sudipta Chakrobarty Vs. Ranaghat S.D. Hospital [CIVIL APPEAL No.9404/2019]
CORAM: Justices Indu Malhotra and Ajay Rastogi
CITATION: LL 2021 SC 100

Click here to Read/Download Judgment

Read Judgment



Next Story
Share it