Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.23 seconds)

R.C.Sharma vs Union Of India & Ors on 6 May, 1976

43. Should the situation continue to remain so helpless for all concerned? The Apex Court made an exhortation in 1976 through a judgment which is reported as R.C Sharma v. Union of India (1976) 3 SCC 574 for expediting delivery of judgments. I too wish to repeat those words as follows: (SCC Headnote) "Nevertheless an unreasonable delay between hearing of arguments and delivery of judgment, unless explained by exceptional or extraordinary circumstances, is highly undesirable even when written arguments are submitted. It is not unlikely that some points which the litigant considers important may have escaped notice. But, what is more important is that litigants must have complete confidence in the results of litigation. This confidence tends to be shaken if there is excessive delay between hearing of arguments and delivery of judgments."
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 56 - M H Beg - Full Document

State Of Punjab vs Jagdev Singh Talwandi on 16 December, 1983

9. Some High Courts have adopted practice of pronouncing the final order without reasoned judgment, which is not delivered for substantial length of time depriving the aggrieved party of the opportunity to seek further judicial redressal. Deprecating such practice, this Court in State of Punjab and Ors. vs. Jagdev Singh Talwandi, (1984) 1 SCC 596 issued directions which were restated time and again on several occasions including in Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh and Anr. vs. State of Gujarat and Ors., (2004) 4 SCC 158, Mangat Ram vs. State of Haryana, (2008) 7 SCC 96 and Ajay Singh and Anr. vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Anr., (2017) 3 SCC 330 and two recent judgments in the matter of Balaji Baliram Mupade and Anr. vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors., (2021) 12 SCC 603 and Ratilal Jhaverbhai Parmar and Ors. vs. State of Gujarat and Ors., 2024 INSC 801 in which one of us (Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra) is a member and K. Madan Mohan Rao vs. Bheemrao Baswanthrao Patil and Ors., 2022 INSC 1025 .
Supreme Court of India Cites 23 - Cited by 113 - Y V Chandrachud - Full Document

Zahira Habibulla H Sheikh And Anr vs State Of Gujarat And Ors on 12 April, 2004

9. Some High Courts have adopted practice of pronouncing the final order without reasoned judgment, which is not delivered for substantial length of time depriving the aggrieved party of the opportunity to seek further judicial redressal. Deprecating such practice, this Court in State of Punjab and Ors. vs. Jagdev Singh Talwandi, (1984) 1 SCC 596 issued directions which were restated time and again on several occasions including in Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh and Anr. vs. State of Gujarat and Ors., (2004) 4 SCC 158, Mangat Ram vs. State of Haryana, (2008) 7 SCC 96 and Ajay Singh and Anr. vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Anr., (2017) 3 SCC 330 and two recent judgments in the matter of Balaji Baliram Mupade and Anr. vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors., (2021) 12 SCC 603 and Ratilal Jhaverbhai Parmar and Ors. vs. State of Gujarat and Ors., 2024 INSC 801 in which one of us (Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra) is a member and K. Madan Mohan Rao vs. Bheemrao Baswanthrao Patil and Ors., 2022 INSC 1025 .
Supreme Court of India Cites 23 - Cited by 897 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1   2 Next