- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Decided
- 22 April 1996
- Bench
- A. S. Anand
- Result
- Appeal allowed.
Headnote
IDR. A.S. ANAND AND S.B. MAJMUDAR, J.f.]
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 :
Section 60(ccc)-Plea of 11011-attacliability of residential house.1-Ex-ecllli11g Cowt as well as High Cowt not dealing with the question-Held, High Coiat oug/lt to have assigned reasons for disniissing the civil revision peti-tion-Obligation to give reasons introduces clarity and n1ini111ises chances of arbitrariness and the higher fonun can test the correctness of those reasons-Matter ren1anded lo High Corut for disposal in accordance ~vith law after hewing pmties-No opinion expressed on the nwits of the case.
Headnote as published in the Digital Supreme Court Reports by the Supreme Court of India. Paragraph references point to the judgment below.
Judgment
The appellant had raised a specific plea in the executing court regarding the non-attachability of his residential house in view of the provisions of Section 60(ccc) C.P.C. The executing court has not dealt with the issue and the High Court, also did not deal with that question and dismissed the civil revision petition by one word "dismissed''. In our opinion, since the parties were present before the High Court in the civil revision, on the plainest consideration of justice, it should have assigned reasons for dismissing the civil revision petition against the order of the executing court. The absence of reasons has deprived this court to know the circumstances which weighed. with the High Court to dismiss the revision petition in limine. We say it with respect, that it was an unsatisfac-tory method of disposal of the revision petition. The necessity to provide reasons, howsoever, brief in support of its conclusion is too obvious to be reiterated. Obligation to give reasons introduces clarity and excludes, or at any rate minimises the chances of arbitrariness and the higher forum can test the correctness of those reasons. The order of the High Court dismiss-ing the civil revision petition, in-limine, thus, cannot be sustained. We, accordingly, accept this appeal and set aside the order of the High Court and r~mand the civil revision petition No. 2064/91 to the High Court for its disposal in accordance with law, after hearing the parties. We, however, clarify that we .are expressing no opinion on the merits of the civil revision petition.
The appeal is accordingly allowed in the above terms. No costs.
Case details
Arising from
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 7559 of 1996.
From the Judgment and Order dated 29.7.91 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in C.R. No. 2064 of 1991.
Appearances
Mahabir Singh for the Appellants.
R.K. Kapoor, S.K. Srivastava, P. Verma and Anis Ahmed Khan for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was deHvered :
Leave. granted.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the record.
Source: Supreme Court of India, Digital Supreme Court Reports, via the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open dataset (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.