Supreme Court Criticises Gujarat HC Bench For Releasing Case Without Judgment 10 Months After Reserving Verdict

It further underscored that releasing a case after hearing it over a substantial period not only amounts to delay but also amplifies the financial burden of the parties.

“Releasing a case after it has been heard over a substantial period and judgment has been reserved compounds not merely the delay, but expense for parties, as well. In such a situation, parties would be required to engage counsel and incur legal fees all over again for a fresh round of hearings.,” marked Chief Justice Of India, DY Chandrachud and Justices Manoj Misra and J B Pardiwala. 

It may also be noted that while hearing this matter, the Chief Justice had orally stressed that such a practice was causing severe dents to the principle of judicial efficacy and speedy justice.

The brief background of this case is that the Gujarat High Court was hearing a petition challenging an arbitration award. Along with this petition, the same judge also heard another petition seeking the execution of the same award. After hearing the parties, the judgment was reserved. However, it remained reserved for a period of ten months until February 08, 2024, when the same was released by the judge on the ground of not being pronounced within a reasonable time. To quote the operative part of this order:

“These petitions were heard and reserved for judgment. However, the judgment is not pronounced for reasonable time and hence, the same are released”.

Pertinently, when the matter was listed before another Bench, the following order was passed: “Not before this Court.”

In light of these facts and circumstances, the Top Court directed the matter to be heard and disposed of by the same judge who passed the above February 08 order.

“The learned Single Judge may, upon the proceedings being mentioned together with a copy of this order, re-list the proceedings for further hearing if it is deemed necessary to refresh the court since a long time has elapsed from the date on which the orders were reserved..” the Court added.

Following this, the Court also requested the judge “to take up the proceedings with all reasonable dispatch.” While the Top Court acknowledged the burden on the High Court, it opined that the case be heard and disposed of as expeditiously as possible.

Case Title: MANBHUPINDER SINGH ATWAL vs. NEERAJ KUMARPAL SHAH., Diary No.- 12457 – 2024

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 307

Clickhere to read/ download the order

Also read: If Judgment Is Not Delivered Within 6 Months After Reserving, Case Should Be Assigned To Another Bench For Fresh Hearing : Supreme Court To HC

Advisable That High Court Delivers Judgment Soon After Conclusion Of Arguments : Supreme Court