Skip to content


Harbans Sharma Vs. Smt. Pritam Kaur - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1982)3SCC386
AppellantHarbans Sharma
RespondentSmt. Pritam Kaur
Excerpt:
- judgment  1. heard counsel. special leave granted.  2. we are not satisfied that the high court was justified in dismissing the revision application summarily. even assuming that the high court came to the conclusion that there was no substance in the arguments advanced on behalf of the tenant, the high court could have indicated its brief reasons in support of the view it took. in these circumstances we have no option save to set aside the order of the high court and remand the matter to it for disposal in accordance with law after hearing both the sides. the high court shall take up for hearing the revision application expeditiously since the proceedings have been pending since 1968.  3. there will be no order as to costs.
Judgment:

Judgment

 1. Heard counsel. Special leave granted.

 2. We are not satisfied that the High Court was justified in dismissing the revision application summarily. Even assuming that the High Court came to the conclusion that there was no substance in the arguments advanced on behalf of the tenant, the High Court could have indicated its brief reasons in support of the view it took. In these circumstances we have no option save to set aside the order of the High Court and remand the matter to it for disposal in accordance with law after hearing both the sides. The High Court shall take up for hearing the revision application expeditiously since the proceedings have been pending since 1968.

 3. There will be no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //