The Art of Writing of Judgments As you know, section 2(9) of the Civil Procedure Code, 9!" defines the term #Judgment$ to me%n &The &The st%tement given 'y the Judge Judge of the grounds of % decree decree or order *n +%ls'ury$s %ws of -ngl%nd, .th -dition, /olume 20 P 20!, it h%s 'een s%id &A 1udgment or order in its fin%l fin%l sh%e usu%lly cont%ins cont%ins in %ddition to form%l %rts34 %rts34 (i) A relimin%ry or introductory %rt, showing the form of the %lic%tion uon which it w%s m%de, the m%nner in which %nd the l%ce %t which, the writ or other origin%ting rocess w%s served, the %rties %e%ring %ny consent, w%ivers, undert%kings or %dmissions given or m%de, so l%ced %s to indic%te whether they rel%te to the whole 1udgment or order or only only %rt of it, %nd % reference reference to the evidence uon which which the 1udgment or order is '%sed '%sed %nd (ii) % su'st%ntive su'st%ntive or m%nd%tory %rt, %rt, cont%ining the order m%de 'y the court 5efore we roceed to underst%nd the me%ning of % &Judgment * consider it necess%ry to mention th%t in the *ncome6t%7 Aell%te Tri'un%l our decisions %re termed %s &8rders *n Civil l%w there is % distinction 'etween &%n order %nd &% Judgment Though strictly se%king the order of the Tri'un%l m%y not 'e construed %s &Judgments within the me%ning of section 2(9) of the CPC ( of 9!"), yet our orders 'eing oen to 1udici%l scrutiny, in my view must cont%in %ll the essenti%ls of % good 1udgment Therefore wherever reference is m%de of % 1udgment it will %tly %ly to the order of the Tri'un%l -ssenti%l fe%tures With this relude * roceed to de%l with some of the essenti%l fe%tures of Judgment Writing To ut it l%inly * com%re the writing of 1udgment with construction of % house roerty :or construction of house roerty, you re;uire % l%n then m%teri%l %nd l%stly e7ecution< ie, construction of the roerty =imil%rly, for writing of 1udgment we need % l%n in resect of which we h%ve to collect m%teri%l %nd then ut it to e7ecution The l%n for writing of 1udgment would 'e the issue which is to 'e decided The m%teri%l for the 1udgment would 'e rovided 'y the record, the %rguments of the %rties %nd the relev%nt c%se l%w Putting th%t m%teri%l in right l%ce would result in % 1udgment *t would 'e relev%nt to refer to section 2.() of the *T Act, 90 The section emowers the Tri'un%l to %ss %n order %s it thinks fit *t m%y thus %e%r th%t Tri'un%l m%y %ccet one view or the other from the %rties without %ssigning %ny re%sons =o, however, it is not so *n the c%se of >nion of *ndi% vs ? @%oor A* 9B. =C "B, their ordshis of =ureme Court o'served %s under &*f the st%tute re;uires recording recording of re%sons, then it is the st%tutory re;uirement re;uirement %nd, therefore, there is no scoe for further in;uiry 5ut even when the st%tute does not imose such %n o'lig%tion it is necess%ry for the ;u%si6 1udici%l %uthorities to
record re%son %s it is only visi'le s%fegu%rd %g%inst ossi'le in1ustice %nd %r'itr%riness %nd %ffords rotection to the erson %dversely %ffected e%sonss %re the links 'etween the m%teri%l on which cert%in conclusions conclusions %re '%sed %nd the %ctu%l conclusions They disclose how the mind is %lied to the su'1ect6m%tter for % decision, whether it is urely %dministr%tive or ;u%si61udici%l They should reve%l r%tion%l ne7us 'etween the f%cts considered %nd the conclusion re%ched 8nly in this w%y c%n oinions or decisions recorded 'e shown to 'e m%nifestly 1ust %nd re%son%'le The following views e7ressed 'y +on$'le Justice = = ?ukher1i, CJ %re %lso ertinent in this conte7t 34 &Decisions from m%ny m%ny %dministr%tive Tri'un%ls Tri'un%ls come u for fin%l %d1udic%tion %d1udic%tion 'efore the highest courts These highest courts in delivering 1udgments h%ve to 'e%r in mind th%t their decisions %re intended to guide %dministr%tors /ery often long %nd el%'or%te 1udgments of voluminous ch%r%cter f%il to offer th%t effective guide to the %dministr%tors in doing r%ctic%l 1ustice in the light of such 1udgments ?%ny of the modern decisions of these higher courts on l%'our, income t%7, customs, coy6rights, tr%dem%rks %re set out in old tr%dition%l %tterns of 1udgments in % m%nner which %re confusing to l%'our %dministr%tors or the income t%7 %dministr%tors or other %dministr%tors who %re to %ct %ccording to such 1udgments They %re comletely lost in the forest of discussions cont%ined in the 1udgments 'y these courts -l%'or%te 1udgments %nd even se%r%te se%r%te 1udgments 'y individu%l individu%l 1udges of the s%me 5ench delivering the decision, often m%ke the osition difficult from the oint of view of their ultim%te utility %nd r%ctic%l %lic%tion -ven interret%tion of wh%t these courts intended to s%y 'ecomes the su'1ect of gre%t %nd lengthy %rguments %nd % good de%l of time is w%sted in finding out wh%t these 1udgments intended ultim%tely to l%y down *t is suggested th%t % new %ttern of 1udgment is c%lled for in modern 1urisrudence seci%lly seci%lly in these cl%sses of c%ses c%ses which %re intended intended to guide %dministr%tors like the *ncome T%7 8fficers, l%'our officers, the *ndustri%l Tri'un%ls, the custom officers %nd other %dministr%tive %gencies including coror%tions, munici%lities %nd u'lic %uthorities Judgments in these cl%sses of c%ses must h%ve % different %ttern They must 'e short, direct, r%ctic%l %nd to the oint, emh%siEing the directives %nd %voiding %rleys %nd %'struse dissert%tions Thus, it is necess%ry for us to %ss % re%soned order which will meet the test of % 1udici%l decision The re;uisites of % 1udici%l decision were l%id down 'y the =ureme Court in 5h%r%t 5%nk td, Delhi vs -mloyees of 5h%r%t 5%nk td, Delhi A* 9! =C "" Their ordshis ;uoted with %rov%l following %ss%ge from Cooer vs Wilson, 9FB, 2@5 F!9 %t %ge F.!34 &A true 1udici%l decision resuose resuose %n e7isting disute disute 'etween two or more %rties %rties %nd then four re;uisites 34 (i) the resent%tion (not necess%rily or%lly) of their c%se 'y the %rties to the disute (ii) if the disute 'etween them is % ;uestion of f%ct, the %scert%inment of the %ct 'y me%ns of evidence %dduced 'y the %rties to the disute %nd often with the %ssist%nce of %rguments 'y or on 'eh%lf of the %rties on the evidence (iii) if the disute 'etween them is % ;uestion of l%w, the su'missions on the leg%l %rguments 'y the %rties %nd (iv) % decision which disoses of the whole
m%tter 'y % finding uon the f%cts in disute %nd %lic%tion of the l%w of the l%nd to the f%cts so found, including wherever re;uired % ruling uon %ny disuted ;uestion of l%w These rinciles were reiter%ted 'y their ordshis of the =ureme Court in the c%se of ?%;'ool +us%in vs =t%te of 5om'%y, A* 9F =C F2 With reference to the orders %ssed 'y the *ncome6t%7 Aell%te Tri'un%l the +on$'le =ureme Court in the c%se of 8m%r =%l%y ?oh%med =%it vs C*T FB *T (=C), l%id down the following rinciles for 1udgment writing36 &The *ncome6t%7 Aell%te Aell%te Tri'un%l is % f%ct finding finding Tri'un%l %nd if it %rrives %rrives %t its own conclusions %fter due consider%tion of the evidence 'efore it the court will not interfere *t is necess%ry, however, th%t every f%ct for %nd %g%inst the %ssessee must h%ve 'een considered with due c%re %nd the Tri'un%l must h%ve given its finding in % m%nner which would cle%rly indic%te wh%t were the ;uestions which %rose for determin%tion, wh%t w%s the evidence ro %nd contr% in reg%rd to e%ch one of them %nd wh%t were the findings re%ched on the e vidence on record 'efore it The conclusions re%ched 'y the Tri'un%l should not 'e coloured 'y %ny irrelev%nt consider%tions or m%tters of re1udice %nd if there %re %ny circumst%nces which re;uire to 'e e7l%ined 'y the %ssessee, the %ssessee should 'e given %n oortunity of doing so 8n no %ccount wh%tever should the Tri'un%l '%se its findings on susicions, con1unctures, or surmises< nor should it %ct on no evidence %t %ll or on imroer re1ection of m%teri%l %nd relev%nt evidence or %rtly on evidence %nd %rtly on susicions, con1unctures or surmises 8rder to cont%in re%sons ecording of re%sons h%s 'een re%d %s %n integr%l %rt of % 1udgment ecording of re%sons is considered to 'e % %rt of n%tur%l 1ustice %nd every 1udici%l %uthority Gu%si6Judici%l Authority including Administr%tive Tri'un%l is 'ound to record re%sons in suort of the orders %ssed 'y it Judgment is the most imort%nt document for the %rties %s well %s the Judge =o f%r %s the %rties %re concerned, wh%t is imort%nt is the ultim%te decision %nd not the re%sons for the decision e%sons %ssume imort%nce only when %n %e%l or revision is filed %g%inst the 1udgment 5ut so f%r %s the Judge is concerned, the re%sons %re very imort%nt They indic%te the working of his mind, his %ro%ch, his gr%s of the ;uestions of f%ct %nd l%w involved in the c%se %nd the deth of his knowledge of l%w *n short, the 1udgment reflects the erson%lity of the Judge %nd, therefore, it is necess%ry th%t it should 'e written with c%re %nd %fter m%ture reflection *t will 'e useful to ;uote the following o'serv%tions of +on$'le Justice ?ukh%r1i34 &The sureme re;uirement re;uirement of % good 1udgment is re%son re%son Judgment is of v%lue v%lue on the strength of its re%sons The weight of % 1udgment, its 'inding ch%r%cter or its ersu%sive ch%r%cter deends on the resent%tion %nd %rticul%tion of re%sons e%son, therefore, is the soul %nd sirit of % good 1udgment *n the c%se of ?%nek% H%ndhi vs >nion of *ndi% A* 9B" =ureme Court 9B their ordshis of the =ureme Court l%id down the following rincile The Courts insists
uon disclosure of re%sons in suort of the order on three grounds 3 () the %rty %ggrieved h%s the oortunity to demonstr%te 'efore the %ell%te or revision%l court th%t the re%sons which ersu%ded the %uthority to re1ect his c%se were erroneous < (2) the o'lig%tion to record re%sons oer%tes %s % deterrent %g%inst ossi'le %r'itr%ry %ction 'y e7ecutive %uthority invested with 1udici%l ower< %nd (F) it gives s%tisf%ction to the %rty %g%inst whom the order is m%de The ower to refuse to disclose re%sons in suort of the order is &e7cetion%l in n%ture %nd it ought to 'e e7ercised f%irly, s%ringly %nd only when fully 1ustified 'y the e7igencies of %n uncommon situ%tion =imil%r view h%s 'een e7ressed in =I ?ukher1ee vs >nion of *ndi% A* 99! =ureme Court 9". *n the c%se of C*T vs W%lch%nd A* 90B =ureme Court .F +on$'le =ureme Court held &the r%ctice of recording of decisions without re%sons in suort c%nnot 'ut 'e derec%ted *n the c%se of C*T vs /ik%s Chemi Hum *ndi%, 2B0 *T F2, the Pun1%' +%ry%n% +igh Court emh%siEed the necessity of giving re%sons in ;u%si61udici%l orders * ;uote from the 1udgment 34 &The re;uirement of recording recording of re%sons %nd %nd communic%tion thereof thereof h%s 'een re%d %s %n integr%l %rt of the concet of f%ir rocedure The necessity of giving re%sons flows from the concet of rule of l%w which constitutes one of the corner stones of our constitution%l set u The %dministr%tive %uthorities ch%rged with the duty to %ct 1udici%lly c%nnot decide the m%tters m%tters on consider%tions consider%tions of olicy or e7ediency e7ediency The re;uirement of recording of re%sons 'y such %uthorities is %n imort%nt s%fegu%rd to ensure o'serv%nce of the rule of l%w *t introduces cl%rity, checks the introduction of e7tr%neous or irrelev%nt consider%tions %nd minimiEes %r'itr%riness in the decision m%king rocess Another re%son which m%kes it imer%tive for the ;u%si61udici%l %uthorities to give re%sons is th%t their orders %re not only su'1ect to the right of the %ggrieved ersons to ch%llenge the s%me 'y filing st%tutory %e%l %nd revision 'ut %lso 'y filing writ etition under Article 220 of the Constitution =uch decisions c%n %lso 'e ch%llenged 'y w%y of %e%l under Article F0 of the Constitution of *ndi% The +igh Courts h%ve the ower to issue writ of certior%ri to ;u%sh the orders %ssed 'y % ;u%si61udici%l %uthorityKTri'un%l ikewise, in %e%l, the =ureme Court c%n nullify such orderKdecision These owers c%n 'e effectively e7ercised 'y the suerior courts only if the order under ch%llenge cont%ins re%sons *n the c%se of Anus%y%'en A Doshi 8thers vs Joint C*T 8rs, 20 *T 0", the +on$'le 5om'%y +igh Court o'served %s under 34 &*t is needless to emh%siEe th%t the order or 1udgment 1udgment should 'e self e7l%n%tory e7l%n%tory *t should not kee the higher Court guessing for re%sons e%sons rovide % live link 'etween conclusions %nd evidence Th%t vit%l link is the s%fegu%rd %g%inst %r'itr%riness, %ssion %nd re1udice e%son is % m%nifest%tion of the mind of the Court or Tri'un%l *t is % tool for 1udging the v%lidity of the order *t gives %n oortunity to the higher Court to see whether the imugned order is '%sed on re%sons %nd th%t the re%sons %re '%sed on %de;u%te leg%l %nd relev%nt m%teri%l Hiving re%sons is %n essenti%l element of %dministr%tion of 1ustice A right to re%sons
is, therefore, %n indisens%'le %rt of % sound system of 1udici%l review e%soned decision is not only for the urose of showing th%t the citiEen is receiving 1ustice, 'ut %lso % v%lid disciline for the %uthority itself Therefore, st%ting of re%sons is one of the essenti%ls of 1ustice *n the le%ding c%se of ?P *ndustries vs >nion of *ndi%, A* 900 (=ureme Court) 0B +on$'le Justice =u''%r%o o'served %s under 3 &*n the conte7t of % welf%re welf%re st%te, %dministr%tive %dministr%tive Tri'un%ls h%ve come come to st%y *ndeed, they %re the necess%ry concomit%nts of % welf%re =t%te 5ut %r'itr%riness in their functioning destroys the concet of % welf%re st%te itself =elf6disciline %nd suervision e7clude or %t %ny r%te minimiEe %r'itr%riness The le%st % Tri'un%l c%n do is to disclose its mind The comulsion of disclosure gu%r%ntees consider%tion consider%tion The condition to give re%sons introduces cl%rity %nd e7cludes or %t %ny r%te minimiEes %r'itr%riness< it gives s%tisf%ction to the %rty %g%inst whom the order is m%de< %nd it %lso en%'les %n %ell%te or suervisory Court to kee the Tri'un%ls within 'ounds A re%soned order is the desir%'le condition of 1udici%l disos%l %ngu%ge Writing of 1udgment is %n %rt To some, it is % n%tur%l gift while for m%ny it needs to 'e cultiv%ted The first re;uisite is % good comm%nd over the l%ngu%ge in which the 1udgment is written +owsoever, +owsoever, correct % 1udgment 1udgment m%y 'e on l%w %nd %nd f%cts, it does not m%ke % good imression while it is couched in oor l%ngu%ge 8n the contr%ry, % oor 1udgment written in imressive l%ngu%ge is l%uded 'y m%ny of course 'y eole who do not underst%nd l%w %ngu%ge is % medium for conveying one$s thoughts %nd it is essenti%l th%t they should 'e conveyed in % m%nner which is lucid %s well %s imressive The l%ngu%ge should, however, 'e simle 5om'%stic or flowery words %nd e7ressions, even though liter%ry should 'e %voided The test is th%t % erson well6versed in l%w should not ordin%rily 'e re;uired to consult % diction%ry Judgment is not % iece of liter%ture to 'e written in the style of =h%kese%re or ?ilton *t is %n ess%y or % comosition intended to convey to % l%wyer of %ver%ge %'ility the re%sons of the Judge for %rriving %t cert%in conclusions of f%cts %nd l%w %nd the rinciles underlying the relev%nt st%tutory rovisions or the 1udici%l decisions on which the decision is '%sed *n short, the l%ngu%ge should 'e simle, yet eleg%nt, cont%ining hr%ses %nd e7ressions which convey with lucidity the leg%l ide%s to the re%der The leg%l terms, e7ressions %nd %tin m%7ims which %re well6 known m%y, however, 'e freely used 'ec%use the rim%ry o'1ect of the 1udgment is to indic%te cle%rly the mind of the Judge 'oth on l%w %nd f%cts The l%ngu%ge should not 'e e;uivoc%l, v%gue or susceti'le of diverse interret%tions *f we c%re to re%d the 1udgments of the Privy Council %nd the +ouse of ords, we would 'e imressed 'y the method in which difficult %nd comle7 leg%l ro'lems %re de%lt with in simle l%ngu%ge Judgments %re not novels or dr%m%tic works so %s to 'ring out the v%rious %sects of hum%n sychology in minute det%ils le%ding to %n e motion%l clim%7 They should 'e 1ust cut %nd dried st%tements st%tements of f%cts %nd l%w, l%w, interwoven in logic, in order order to get %t the truth, 'ut no m%teri%l f%ct should 'e omitted There m%y 'e % gener%liE%tion here or there with % liter%ry flourish 'ut th%t is %ll Judgment dem%nds disciline in the
use of words %nd e7ressions< one should not s%y either more or less th%n wh%t is strictly necess%ry %nd th%t too with recision 5revity =oul of Hood Judgment *t is necess%ry to %void reetition of f%cts %nd l%w in the 1udgment 5revity is the soul of % good 1udgment while roli7ity is % vice 5ut 'revity must not 'e %t the cost of cl%rity A good 1udgment should not cont%in unnecess%ry cit%tions cit%tions of recedents -ven long ;uot%tions from the recedents should 'e %voided 8nly the relev%nt %nd most striking %ss%ges from % recedent should 'e icked u in order to suort the oint for decision Iorm%lly the 1udgment should notice every %rgument %t the 5%r 'ut % 5ench is not 'ound to notice e%ch %nd every %rgument if it is entirely irrelev%nt %nd 'eside the oint =uch %rguments m%y 'e 'riefly mentioned %nd summ%rily re1ected %s either irrelev%nt or not in oint %tio Decidendi3 5inding Precedents As the 1udgments of the suerior courts %re 'inding on the su'ordin%te courts, their r%tio should 'e cle%rly indic%ted %nd where % %rticul%r oint merits el%'or%te discussion of v%rious %uthorities the conclusion of the 5ench should 'e indic%ted %t the end in very recise terms *n the c%se of C*T vs =un -ngineering Works P td (992) 9" *T 29B L299 the +on$'le =ureme Court l%id down the following rincile of l%w3 &*t is neither desir%'le nor ermissi'le to ick out % word word or % sentence from from the 1udgment of the =ureme Court Court divorced from the conte7t conte7t of the ;uestion under consider%tion %nd tre%ted to 'e the comlete l%w decl%red 'y the Court The 1udgment must 'e re%d %s % whole %nd the o'serv%tions o'serv%tions from the 1udgment 1udgment h%ve to 'e considered in the light of the ;uestions which were 'efore the Court A decision of the =ureme Court t%kes its colour from the ;uestions involved in the c%se in which it is rendered %nd while %lying the decision to % l%ter c%se, courts must c%refully try to %scert%in the true rincile l%id down 'y the decision *n the c%se of C*T vs Th%ne -lectricity =uly td, 2!0 *T B2B, their ordshi of the 5om'%y +igh Court l%id down the following gener%l rinciles with reg%rd to recedents3 The l%w decl%red 'y the =ureme Court 'eing 'inding on %ll courts in *ndi%, the decisions of the =ureme Court %re 'inding on %ll courts, e7cet, however, the =ureme Court itself which is free to review the s%me %nd de%rt from its e%rlier oinion if the situ%tion so w%rr%nts w%rr%nts Wh%t is 'inding is, of course, the r%tio of the decision %nd not every e7ression found therein The decisions of the +igh Court %re 'inding on the su'ordin%te courts %nd %uthorities or Tri'un%ls under its suerintendence throughout the territories in rel%tion to which it e7ercises 1urisdiction *t does not e7tend 'eyond its territori%l 1urisdiction
The osition in reg%rd to the 'inding n%ture of the decisions of % +igh Court on different 5enches of the s%me court, m%y 'e summed u %s follows3 A single 1udge of % +igh Court is 'ound 'y the decision of %nother single 1udge or % Division 5ench of the s%me +igh Court *t would 'e 1udici%l imroriety to ignore th%t decision, 1udici%l comity dem%nds th%t % 'inding decision to which his %ttention h%d 'een dr%wn should neither 'e ignored nor overlooked A Division 5ench of % +igh Court should follow the decision of %nother Division 5ench of e;u%l strength or % :ull 5ench of the s%me +igh Court *f one Division 5ench differs from %nother Division 5ench of the s%me +igh Court, it should refer the c%se to % l%rger 5ench (i) Where there %re conflicting decisions of courts of co6ordin%te 1urisdiction, the l%ter decision is to 'e referred if re%ched %fter full consider%tion of the e%rlier decisions (%) The decision of one +igh Court is neither 'inding recedent for %nother +igh Court nor for courts or Tri'un%l outside its territori%l 1urisdiction *n the c%se of @un%h%y%mmed 8thers vs =t%te of @er%l% %nd Another, (2!!!) 2. *T F0!, their ordshis of the =ureme Court l%id down the following rincile of l%w rel%ting to the recedents &The 1urisdiction conferred conferred 'y Article F0 is divisi'le into into two st%ges< the first st%ge st%ge is u to the disos%l of the r%yer for seci%l le%ve to %e%l< the second st%ge commences if %nd when the le%ve to %e%l is gr%nted %nd the etition for seci%l le%ve to %e%l is converted into %n %e%l While he%ring the etition for seci%l le%ve to %e%l, the =ureme Court is c%lled uon to see whether the etitioner should 'e gr%nted such le%ve or not While he%ring such etition, the =ureme Court does not e7ercise its %ell%te 1urisdiction< it merely e7ercises its discretion%ry 1urisdiction to gr%nt or not to gr%nt le%ve to %e%l *f the etition seeking gr%nt of seci%l le%ve is dismissed, it is %n e7ression of oinion 'y the =ureme Court th%t % c%se for invoking the %ell%te 1urisdiction of the court w%s not m%de out An order refusing seci%l le%ve to %e%l m%y 'e 'y % non6se%king order or 'y % se%king order *n either c%se, it does not %ttr%ct the doctrine of merger An order refusing seci%l le%ve to %e%l does not st%nd su'stituted in the l%ce of the order under ch%llenge All th%t it me%ns is th%t the =ureme Court w%s not inclined to e7ercise its discretion so %s to %llow the %e%l 'eing filed Wh%tever 'e the hr%seology emloyed in the order of dismiss%l, if it is % non6se%king order< ie, it does not %ssign re%son for dismissing the seci%l le%ve etition, it would neither %ttr%ct the doctrine or merger so %s to st%nd su'stituted in the l%ce of the order ut in issue 'efore it, nor 'e % decl%r%tion of l%w 'y the =ureme Court under Article . of the Constitution for there is no l%w which h%s 'een decl%red *f the order refusing seci%l le%ve to %e%l is % se%king order< ie, it gives re%sons for refusing the gr%nt of le%ve, then the order h%s two imlic%tions :irstly, the
st%tement of l%w cont%ined in the order is % decl%r%tion of l%w 'y the =ureme Court within the me%ning of Article . which will o'viously 'e 'inding on %ll Courts %nd Tri'un%ls in *ndi% %nd cert%inly the %rties thereto =econdly, other th%n the decl%r%tion of l%w, wh%tever is st%ted in the order or the findings recorded 'y the =ureme Court which would 'e 'inding on the %rties %nd the Court, Tri'un%l or %uthority whose order w%s under ch%llenge, in %ny roceedings su'se;uent thereto on the rincile of 1udici%l disciline, the =ureme Court 'eing the Ae7 Court of the country The decl%r%tion of l%w will 'e governed 'y Article . 'ut the c%se not 'eing one, where le%ve is gr%nted, the doctrine of merger does not %ly The =ureme Court m%y %ly its mind to the meritworthiness of the etitioner$s r%yer seeking le%ve to %e%l %nd h%ving formed %n oinion m%y s%y &dismissed on the merits =uch %n order m%y 'e %ssed even in the %'sence of the oosite %rty The dismiss%l would rem%in % dismiss%l 'y % non6se%king order where no re%sons h%ve 'een %ssigned %nd no l%w h%s 'een decl%red 'y the =ureme Court The dismiss%l is not of the %e%l 'ut of the etition for seci%l le%ve to %e%l -ven if the merits h%ve 'een gone into, they %re the merits of the seci%l le%ve etition only Ieither the doctrine of merger nor Article . is %ttr%cted to such %n order *n the c%se of CJT vs Arun% 5%i +%rgovind A= P%tel (2!!F) B9 CT .2! (Hu1) it w%s held < &*f views of =ureme Court Court e7ressed in e%rlier decision %re e7l%ined e7l%ined in % su'se;uent decision, the e7l%n%tion in su'se;uent decision will h%ve to 'e followed even if su'se;uent decision is rendered 'y % sm%ller 5ench of the =ureme Court Iot following e%rlier orders of Co6ordin%te 5enches The 5om'%y +igh Court in the c%se of *C*C* vs D D u%reli% (2!!!) 99 Com C%ses " L " held th%t to 'e % r%tio decidendi %mongst others, the minimum re;uirements %re34 Th%t the m%tter w%s directly in issue Th%t the issue needs to h%ve 'een decided, %nd Th%t the m%tter h%s 'een decided 'y giving re%sons *n the c%se of 5lue =t%r td vs C*T, 2B *T . %t %ge 2!, their ordshis of 5om'%y +igh Court held, &Though ?r ?istri h%s relied uon 1udgments referred to %'ove, %s o'served 'y the -%rl of +%ls'ury C in the c%se of Guimm vs e%them (9!) AC .9 (+) every 1udgment must 'e re%d %s %lic%'le to the %rticul%r f%cts roved or %ssumed to 'e roved, since the gener%lity of the e7ression which m%y 'e found there or not intended to 'e e76ositioned of the whole l%w, 'ut governed %nd ;u%lified 'y the %rticul%r f%cts of the c%se in which such e7ressions %re found %nd % c%se is only %n %uthority for wh%t is %ctu%lly decides *n Am'ik% Pr%s%d ?ishr% vs =t%te of >P A* 9"! (=C) B02, the =ureme Court held< &-very new discovery or %rgument%tive novelty, c%nnot undue or comel consider%tion of % 'inding recedent A decision does not lose its %uthority merely
'ec%use it w%s '%dly %rgued, in%de;u%tely considered or f%ll%ciously decided *n the c%se of -kn%th ?ukk%w%r vs =t%te of ?%h%r%shtr% A* 9BB (=C) BB, the =ureme Court held th%t it is oen to the su'se;uent Division 5ench to differ from the decision of the e%rlier 5ench 'ut in th%t c%se the only 1udici%l %ltern%tive is to refer to % l%rger 5ench %nd not to disose of the m%tter 'y t%king % contr%ry view P%ssion Although logic is %n imort%nt %rt of % good 1udgment, %ssion c%nnot sometimes 'e wholly e7cluded 'ut it must 'e the 1udici%l %ssion with % cle%r fl%me %nd with %s little smoke %s ossi'le =tructures =ome Judges while reversing the 1udgments of the su'ordin%te court re%dily %ssume th%t the Judge %cted under imroer motives %nd %ss strictures on him This is not f%ir *n c%ses where evidence is evenly '%l%nced, different Judges m%y 'e inclined to come to different conclusion on %reci%tion of the entire evidence 5ut merely 'ec%use the finding of % su'ordin%te court does not %e%r to 'e correct to % suerior court or its %ro%ch %e%rs to 'e erroneous, it would not 'e roer to imute imroer motives to the Judge of the su'ordin%te court while reversing his decision A Judge does not mind if his decision is uset 'y % suerior court 'ut he feels distressed if his motives %re ;uestioned %nd it is %lso not in the interests of %dministr%tion of 1ustice 'ec%use it is likely to sh%ke the confidence of the litig%nt u'lic in the im%rti%lity of the Judge *t would 'e ertinent in this connection to refer to the following o'serv%tions of their ordshis of the =ureme Court in *shw%ri Pr%s%d ?isr% vs ?oh%mm%d *s%, A* 90F =C B2" (BF0) while reversing the decision of the +igh Court which h%d %ssed severe strictures %g%inst the Judge of the lower court 34 &We %re constr%ined constr%ined to o'serve th%t the +igh Court Court w%s not 1ustified 1ustified in %ssing these strictures %g%inst the tri%l Judge in de%ling with the resent c%se Judici%l e7erience shows th%t in %d1udic%ting uon the riv%l cl%ims 'rought 'efore the courts it is not %lw%ys e%sy to decide where truth lies -vidence is %dduced 'y the resective %rties in suort of their conflicting contentions %nd circumst%nces %re simil%rly ressed into service *n such % c%se, it is no dou't the duty of the Judge to consider the evidence o'1ectively %nd dis%ssion%tely, e7%mine it in the light of ro'%'ilities %nd decide which w%y the truth lies The imression formed 'y the Judge %'out the ch%r%cter of the evidence will ultim%tely determine the conclusion which he re%ches 5ut it would 'e uns%fe to overlook the f%ct th%t %ll 1udici%l minds m%y not re%ct in the s%me w%y to the s%id evidence %nd it is not unusu%l th%t evidence which %e%rs to 'e resect%'le %nd trustworthy to one Judge m%y not %e%r to 'e resect%'le %nd trustworthy to %nother Judge Th%t e7l%ins why in some c%ses courts of %e%l reverse conclusions of f%cts recorded 'y the tri%l Court on its %reci%tion of or%l evidence The knowledge th%t %nother view is ossi'le on the evidence %dduced in % c%se, %cts %s % so'ering f%ctor %nd le%ds to the use of temer%te l%ngu%ge in recording 1udici%l conclusions Judici%l %ro%ch in such c%ses should %lw%ys 'e '%sed on the consciousness th%t one m%y m%ke % mist%ke< th%t is why the use of unduly strong words in e7ressing conclusions or the %dotion of unduly strong
intemer%te, or e7tr%v%g%nt criticism, %g%inst the contr%ry view, which %re often found on % sense of inf%lli'ility should %lw%ys 'e %voided The +on$'le =ureme Court in the c%se of =@ /isw%m'%r%n /isw%m'%r%n vs - @oy% @%nu1%, A* 9"B =C .F0 l%id down the following rincile 34 *t h%s 'een 1udici%lly recogniEed th%t in the m%tter of m%king dis%r%ging rem%rks %g%inst ersons or %uthorities whose conduct comes into consider%tion 'efore court of l%w in c%ses to 'e decided 'y them, it is relev%nt to consider3 4 Whether the %rty whose conduct in ;uestion is 'efore the court h%s %n oortunity of e7l%iningKdefending himself< Whether there is evidence on record 'e%ring on th%t conduct 1ustifying rem%rks %nd< Whether it is necess%ry for the decision of the c%se %s %n integr%l %rt thereof, to in%dvert on th%t conduct *t h%s %lso 'een recogniEed th%t 1udici%l ronouncements ronouncements must 'e 1udici%l in n%ture %nd should not norm%lly de%rt from so'riety, moder%tion %nd reserve Judgment should 'e free from 8'stin%cy %nd 5i%s *n writing % 1udgment it is necess%ry for % JudgeK?em'er to o'serve the rinciles of n%tur%l 1ustice * m%y refer to some of the relev%nt rinciles of n%tur%l 1ustice for writing % 1udgment Princiles of n%tur%l 1ustice Princiles of n%tur%l 1ustice %re sole of %n %dministr%tion of 1ustice %nd need to 'e %dhered to in order to m%ke the order 1ust %nd f%ir I%tur%l 1ustice is %n imort%nt concet in %dministr%tive l%w *n the words of ?eg%rry J in the c%se of John vs ees (909) 2 (A**) - 2B., &it is 1ustice th%t is simle %nd element%ry, %s distinct from 1ustice th%t is comle7, sohistic%ted sohistic%ted %nd technic%l technic%l The rinciles of n%tur%l n%tur%l 1ustice or fund%ment%l rules of rocedure for %dministr%tive %ction %re neither fi7ed nor rescri'ed in %ny code They %re 'etter known th%n descri'ed %nd e%rlier rocl%imed th%n defined I%tur%l 1ustice h%s me%nt m%ny things to m%ny writers, l%wyers %nd systems of l%w *t h%s m%ny colours %nd sh%des %nd m%ny forms %nd sh%es According to D- =mith in 1udici%l review of %dministr%tive %ction 99 P FB" the term n%tur%l 1ustice e7resses the close rel%tionshi 'etween the common l%w %nd mor%l rinciles %nd it h%s %n imressive %ncestry *t is %lso known %s su'st%nti%l 1ustice, fund%ment%l 1ustice, univers%l 1ustice or f%ir l%y in %ction *t is % gre%t hum%niEing rinciles intended to invest l%w with f%irness to secure 1ustice %nd to revent misc%rri%ge of 1ustice *n Wisemen vs / /ornem%n (9B) AC 29B, it is o'served34 &The concetion of n%tur%l 1ustice should %t %ll st%ges guide those who disch%rge 1udici%l function is not merely %n %ccet%'le 'ut is %n essenti%l %rt of the hilosohy of the l%w *t w%s held in the c%se of A @ @%r%i%k vs >nion of *ndi% A* 9B! =C ! th%t the rincile of n%tur%l 1ustice is '%sed on three m%7ims %s under34 i) Io m%n sh%ll 'e %
Judge of his own c%use Deciding %uthority should 'e im%rti%l %nd without 'i%s ii) Justice should not only 'e done 'ut m%nifestly %nd undou'tedly 'e seen to 'e done, %nd iii) Judges like C%es%r$s wife should 'e %'ove susicion Audi Alter%m P%rtem 34 Io m%n should 'e condemned unhe%rd 5oth sides must 'e he%rd There must 'e f%irness on the %rt of the deciding %uthority There %re three tyes of 'i%s 34 i) Pecuni%ry 'i%s ii) Person%l 'i%s %nd iii) 8ffici%l 'i%s or 'i%s to su'1ect m%tter Pecuni%ry 'i%s 4 *t is well settled th%t %s reg%rd ecuni%ry interest the le%st ecuni%ry interest in the su'1ect m%tter of litig%tion will dis;u%lify %ny erson from %cting %s % Judge A ecuni%ry interest however slight will dis;u%lify even though it is not roved th%t the decision in %ny w%y %ffected Person%l 'i%s 4 The second tye of 'i%s is % erson%l one A num'er of circumst%nces m%y give rise to erson%l 'i%s +ere % Judge m%y 'e % rel%tive< % friend or 'usiness %ssoci%te of % %rty +e m%y h%ve some erson%l grudge, enmity or griev%nces or rofession%l riv%lry %g%inst such %rty *n view of these f%ctors, there is every likelihood th%t the Judge m%y 'e 'i%s tow%rds one %rty or re1udiced tow%rds the other 8fici%l 'i%s 4 The third tye 'i%s is offici%l 'i%s or 'i%s %s to the su'1ect m%tter This %rise when the Judge h%s % gener%l interest in the su'1ect m%tter *n the c%se of ?%n%k %l vs Dr Prem Ch%nd A* 9B =C . 2, the +on$'le =ureme Court l%id down the test of 'i%s in the following words 34 &*n such c%ses the the test is not whether in f%ct f%ct % 'i%s is %ffect the the 1udgment< the test %lw%ys is %nd must 'e whether % litig%nt could re%son%'ly %rehend th%t % 'i%s %ttri'ut%'le to % mem'er of % Tri'un%l might h%ve oer%ted %g%inst him in the fin%l decision of the Tri'un%l *n the c%se of %n1it Th%kur vs >nion of *ndi% (9"B) . =CC 0, the +on$'le =ureme Court l%id down the following test rel%ting to the 'i%s34 &As to the test of likelihood of 'i%s, 'i%s, wh%t is relev%nt is re%son%'leness of of the %rehension in th%t reg%rd in the mind of the %rty The correct %ro%ch for the Judge is not to look %t his own mind %nd %sk himself, however honestly &Am * 'i%sM 'ut to look %t the mind of the %rty 'efore him *t is well understood th%t the '%sic ingredient of 1ustice is th%t it must m%nifestly %nd undou'tedly 'e seen to 'e done *n the c%se of A1it @um%r =engut%, their ordshis of the =ureme Court h%d to remind us of this rincile once %g%in34 &Whether 1udici%l o'stin%cy o'stin%cy c%n 'e tre%ted %s % form of 'i%s N At the the outset one m%y out6 rightly feel th%t &o'stin%cy %nd &'i%s must rem%in out of the 1udici%l minds %nd if the two h%en to go together, one c%n e7ect only 1udici%l %n%rchy
Their ordshis further o'served3 &8ne of the re;uirements of I%tur%l I%tur%l Justice is th%t th%t the he%ring should 'e done done 'y % 1udge with %n un'i%sed mind mind &5i%s m%y 'e defined %s % re6conceived oinion oinion or % re6disosition or re6determin%tion to decide % c%se or %n issue in % %rticul%r m%nner, so much so th%t such re6disosition does not le%ve the mind oen to conviction Thus, 'i%s is % condition of mind, which sw%ys 1udgments %nd renders the 1udge un%'le to e7ercise im%rti%lity in % %rticul%r c%se *t c%n 'e % ecuni%ry 'i%s, erson%l 'i%s, 'i%s %s to su'1ect m%tter in disute, or olicy 'i%s ?%y 'e it is for this re%son some 1udges who h%il from the old school of thought still refer th%t % 1udge should shun news%ers 'efore coming to the court where he m%y h%ve to de%l with % c%se %lre%dy %e%red in the morning he%dlines *t m%y re1udice his mind or to s%y it m%y c%use re1udging the issue *n either of the c%ses, the he%ring m%y 'e &'i%sed not necess%rily %g%inst the %ccused Th%t m%y 'e the re%son th%t u'lic%tion of stories rel%ted to the ongoing leg%l roceedings %re termed %s &tri%l 'y medi% *t is not suggested th%t the 1udici%l mind is ever influenced 'y such reorts 'ut nevertheless it h%s 'een m%de % ground for shunning the ress out of the courts 5ut in the inst%nt c%se of A1it @um%r =engut%, the court de%lt with wh%t it descri'ed %s &% new form of 'i%s, n%mely 'i%s on %ccount of 1udici%l o'stin%cy Admittedly, 1udges %re not inf%lli'le As hum%n 'eings they c%n commit mist%kes -ven the 'est of their 1udgments reflect their h%rd work, im%rti%l thinking %nd o'1ective %ssessment Then there is %n en%'ling mech%nism through which, it is 'elieved, % mist%ke committed in % 1udici%l order is corrected through revision 'y % l%rger 'ench 5ut, if % 1udgment is overruled 'y the higher court, the 1udici%l disciline re;uires th%t the 1udge whose 1udgment is overruled must su'mit to th%t verdict +e c%nnot, in the s%me roceedings or in % coll%ter%l roceedings 'etween the s%me %rties, rewrite the overruled 1udgment The 1udge m%y h%ve his occ%sion to reiter%te his dogm%tic views on % %rticul%r ;uestion of l%w 'ut not in the s%me c%se &*f it is done, it would 'e e7hi'itive of his 'i%s in his own f%vour to s%tisfy his egoistic 1udici%l o'stin%cy, the 1udges h%ve stressed *n other words, 1udici%l disciline dem%nds th%t % 1udge must 'e im%rti%l %nd neutr%l %nd 'e in % osition to %ly his mind o'1ectively to the f%cts in the c%se 'efore him *f he is re6disosed or suffers from re1udices or h%s % 'i%sed mind, he dis;u%lifies himself from %cting %s % 1udge, the 1udgment %dds The 1udgment is e;u%lly good for %ny org%n of the st%te which is not inf%lli'le in ch%r%cter *n order to m%ke % good 1udgment, it is necess%ry to kee in mind th%t one h%s to 'e oen minded, decisive, 'right %nd intelligent, re%ding %ers in %dv%nce, icking u
wh%t is s%id in the court very ;uickly, getting to the 'ottom of the c%se %nd roducing %n interesting %nd succinct 1udgment ;uickly %nd come to the gris of the m%tter *t is %lso necess%ry to kee in mind th%t % good 1udgment is the 1oint effort of '%r %nd the 'ench The %im of the '%r %nd 5ench is to deliver 1ustice The '%r %nd the 'ench h%ve to work together %s two wheels of 1ustice *f there is synchroniE%tion of the two wheels of 1ustice, there would 'e smooth run of the vehicle of 1ustice The 1udgments %re undou'tedly undou'tedly the most imort%nt %rt of the %dministr%tion of 1ustice 1ustice %nd deserve the highest resect ?em'ers listen to %rguments everyd%y *n my view, it is %lso necess%ry to s%re some time to listen to %ssessment of our functioning in the mind of litig%nts A comliment %id to % good 1udgeK?em'er is when you left his court you never felt th%t in1ustice h%d 'een done %nd if you lost you never felt th%t you were che%ted There is no gre%ter comliment th%n this % 1udgeK?em'er c%n %sire %sire for +owever, * would would h%sten to %dd here th%t th%t do not listen to those who comliment us only to le%se our ego for %%rent re%sons &Person%l emotions of % 1udici%l officer h%s no no l%ce in the 1udgment he writes writes while de%ling with v%rious c%ses The Delhi +igh Court h%s l%id down cert%in guideline on this %sect in 1udgment writing * ;uote 34 &-motions h%ve no l%ce l%ce in % 1udgment which h%s to 'e '%sed on f%cts f%cts %s resented 'y %rties %nd the evidence, or%l or document%ry There should never 'e %ny disl%y of emotions or sentiments in the 1 udgment, the 'ench s%id The court further s%id, &% 1udge neither rew%rds virtue nor ch%stises vice +e only %dministers even6h%nded 1ustice 'etween m%n %nd m%n %nd 'etween % citiEen %nd the =t%te This c%rdin%l rincile should %lw%ys 'e remem'ered while constructing % 1udgment or the order The The 1udgment should ordin%rily ordin%rily cont%in st%tement of f%cts, f%cts, oints in disute, findings on oints in disute on the '%sis of evidence %nd documents %nd re%sons for gr%nting or refusing orderKrelief &Anything which directly or or indirectly %ggr%v%tes %ggr%v%tes the emotion definitely induces induces %n element of erversity, the 'ench s%id The court should %'st%in from h%rsh or ungenerous criticism of me%sures t%ken in good f%ith 'y those who 'e%r the resonsi'ility of the Hovernment, it s%id The 'ench s%id % 1udgment must 'e c%lm %nd '%l%nced %nd neither it should show re1udice nor sym%thy %nd %dvised the 1udici%l officers th%t &sheer length of 1udgment %nd its hysic%l hysic%l weight is not the inde7 of its ;u%lity ;u%lity &The ;u%lity deends on the resent%tion of f%cts, discussion of the issues of 'oth f%cts %nd l%w %nd the ;u%lity of the re%sons, the 'ench %dded The erson%l hilosohy %nd erson%l references should not 'e ronounced in the 1udgment, which would invite invite levelling of the 1udge %s ro6l%ndlord ro6l%ndlord or ro6ten%nt, ro6revenue or %nti6revenue, ro6l%'our or ro6m%n%gement etc, the order s%id
&The 1udici%l officers %re %re hum%n 'eings %nd their their f%mily '%ckground< '%ckground< educ%tion or environment m%y find reflection in their decision6m%king rocess 5ut over % eriod, the 1udge must det%ch himself from these fi7%tions %nd decide c%ses strictly in %ccord%nce with l%w, e;uity %nd 1ustice, the 'ench s%id esenting the high6flown l%ngu%ge used in cert%in 1udgments, the division 'ench s%id, &The 1udgments %re '%sic%lly me%nt to 'e re%d %nd understood 'y l%ymen, not 'y schol%rs Advising the 1udici%l officers not to write long6winded 1udgments, the 'ench s%id, &Judgments should not 'e roli7 roli7 or ver'ose The roli7 roli7 1udgment is % tortur torture e to write %nd % torture to re%d The court %lso %dvised the 1udici%l officers not to l%y to the g%llery 'y s%ying th%t &1udici%l officers should not %c;uire 1ourn%listic Ee%l Ee%l or write something something seci%l for the ress The en of the 1udges should 'e like the knife of % surgeon which ro'es into the flesh only %s much %s is %'solutely necess%ry for the urose of the c%se 'efore it, the court s%id %nd %dded th%t &dis%r%ging rem%rks which %re not w%rr%nted 'y evidence %g%inst % erson should never 'e m%de &The l%ngu%ge of 1udgment 1udgment should 'e so'er, dignified, restr%ined restr%ined %nd temer%te %nd %nd in no c%se s%tiric%l or f%ctitious Judici%l officers should refr%in from 'eing s%rc%stic in their 1udgments, the 'ench s%id Areci%tion of evidence *t re;uires % good de%l of thought %nd m%ture consider%tion to %rrive %t % %rticul%r conclusion of f%ct %fter scrutiniEing the evidence of 'oth the %rties -very m%teri%l document of either side should 'e considered, %nd so %lso every m%teri%l %rt of the evidence should 'e considered %nd roerly m%rsh%led, indic%ting wh%t v%lue the 1udgeK?em'er %tt%ches to e%ch e%ch %nd which %rt %rt of the evidence he considers considers inconse;uenti%l or unreli%'le with re%sons therefor :rom the e%rliest d%ys, it h%s 'een one of the very imort%nt resonsi'ilities of the Judges to %scert%in the ver%city of the evidence 'y v%rious me%ns in order to get %t the truth *t is, therefore, necess%ry for the JudgeK?em'er to 'e %lert %nd vigil%nt while %reci%ting evidence *n the c%se of C*T vs Durg% Pr%s%d ?ore (9B) "2 *T .!, their ordshis of +on$'le =ureme Court l%id down the following rincile of l%w 34 &=cience h%s not yet invented invented %ny instrument instrument to test the reli%'ility of the evidence l%ced 'efore % court of Tri'un%l Therefore, the courts %nd Tri'un%ls h%ve to 1udge the evidence 'efore them 'y %lying the test of hum%n ro'%'ilities +um%n minds m%y differ %s to the reli%'ility of % iece of evidence *n the c%se of vs Dy *ndustri%l *n1uries Commissioner, -7 P%rte ?oore (90)
G5 .0, the correct leg%l osition h%s 'een enunci%ted 'y Dilock, J %s under34 &The re;uirement th%t % erson erson e7ercising e7ercising ;u%si61udici%l functions must must '%se his decision on evidence me%ns no more th%n it must 'e '%sed uon m%teri%l which temts logic%lly to show the e7istence or non e7istence of f%cts relev%nt to the issue to 'e determined, or to show the likelihood or unlikelihood of the occurrence of some future events the occurrence of which would 'e relev%nt *t me%ns th%t he must not sin % coin or consult %n strologer, 'ut th%t he must t%ke into %ccount %ny m%teri%l which, %s % m%tter of re%son, h%s some ro'%tive v%lue4 *t it is c%%'le of h%ving %ny ro'%tive v%lue, the weight to 'e %tt%ched to it is % m%tter for the erson to whom P%rli%ment h%s entrusted the resonsi'ility of deciding the issue Oet, %s held 'y the =ureme Court in the c%se of 5%reilly -lectricity Co vs Workm%n (9B) 2 =CC 0B, this does not me%n th%t Administr%tive Tri'un%l c%n decide % m%tter without %ny evidence on record or c%n %ct uon wh%t is not evidence in the eye of l%w or on % document not roved to 'e % genuine one =e%king for the Court e%dy J o'served &it is inconceiv%'le th%t the Tri'un%l c%n %ct on wh%t is not evidence such %s he%rs%y, nor c%n it 1ustify the Tri'un%l in '%sing its %w%rd on coies of documents when the origin%ls which %re in e7istence %re not roduced %nd roved 'y one of the methods either 'y %ffid%vit or 'y witness who h%ve e7ecuted them, if they %re %live %nd c%n 'e roduced Decision on Guestions of %w While de%ling with issues of l%w, it is not necess%ry to st%te the whole l%w on the su'1ect commencing from element%ry rinciles suorted 'y numerous rulings The discussion should 'e 'rief 'ut ointed %nd should 'e suorted 'y some imort%nt decisions *f there is % direct %uthority of the =ureme Court or of Jurisdiction%l +igh Court, it is unnecess%ry to encum'er the 1udgment with other %uthorities :in%l order After de%ling with %ll the issues the fin%l decision should 'e indic%ted in the concluding %r%g%h with suit%'le directions +%ving understood the '%sic fe%tures of #Writing of Judgment we m%y h%ve %lso to 'e%r in mind th%t the 1udgment %lso reflects the erson%lity of the ?em'ers writing the 1udgments Therefore, it m%y not 'e out of l%ce to refer in 'rief to some of the virtues of the ?em'ers to roduce good Judgments Cl%rity 5efore roceeding to write or dict%te % 1udgment the mind should 'e cle%r %'out the conclusions of f%ct %nd l%w %nd the fin%l order 8ne should not commence writing % 1udgment 'efore m%king u his mind mind An unduly roli7 1udgment, 1udgment, like the lengthy %nd r%m'ling %rguments of % counsel, is usu%lly the roduct of % confused mind *t is 'est %voided
+onesty +onesty of urose is the first essenti%l re;uirement of % successful ?em'er +e must 'e honest to the c%use of 1ustice *f he is not sincere enough in his effort, the result would 'e dis%strous A ?em'er h%s got to 'e honest %nd sincere to the %rties 'efore him * %m reminded of the writing of :r%ncis 5%con in the -ss%ys of Judic%ture 34 Judges ought to 'e more le%rned th%n witty, more reverend th%n l%usi'le, %nd more %dvised th%n confident A'ove %ll things, integrity is their ortion %nd roer virtue Cour%ge A ?em'er must write the order fe%rlessly keeing in mind decency %nd decorum without 'eing 'row'e%ten or over%wed 'y the overEe%lous %rguments %dv%nced 'efore him A ?em'er must write the order to the 'est of his %'ility A ?em'er must 'e 'old 'ut his order should not e7ress %ny indisciline, 'i%s or highh%ndedness The re%sons for re%ching to the conclusion should 'e given to the 'est of one$s %'ility *t will 'e relev%nt to refer to the f%mous o'serv%tions of the =ureme Court in the c%se of Distri'utors (5%rod%) P td vs >nion of *ndi% B 8thers, *T 2! 34 &We h%ve given our most %n7ious consider%tion consider%tion to this ;uestion, %rticul%rly %rticul%rly since one of us, n%mely PI 5h%gw%ti J w%s % %rty to the decision in Cloth Tr%ders$ c%se 5ut h%ving reg%rd to the v%rious consider%tions to which we sh%ll %dvert in det%il when we e7%mine the %rguments %dv%nced on 'eh%lf of the %rties, we %re comelled to re%ch the conclusion th%t Cloth Tr%ders$ c%se must 'e reg%rded %s wrongly decided The view t%ken in th%t c%se in reg%rd to the construction of s "!? must 'e held to 'e erroneous %nd it must 'e corrected To eretu%te %n error is no heroism To rectify it is the comulsion of the 1udici%l conscience *n this, we derive comfort %nd strength from the wise %nd insring words of Justice 5ronson in Pierce vs Del%meter (A?O %t %ge ")3 &%s 1udge ought to 'e wise enough to know th%t he is f%lli'le %nd, therefore, ever re%dy to le%rn 3 gre%t %nd honest enough to disc%rd %ll mere ride of oinion %nd follow truth wherever it m%y le%d3 %nd cour%geous enough to %cknowledge his errors e rrors +%rdwork *t is necess%ry to kee in mind th%t writing % good order re;uires h%rd work There is % s%ying in Hu1%r%ti, &The sweetness of the food item deends uon the e7tent of J%ggery ut therein A mem'er must %sire to live like % hermit %nd work like % horse The l%w is known to 'e % Je%lous mistress more %tt%ched one is to such % mistress 'etter results %re o't%ined in writing orders &An inefficient 'ut honest Judge is not of much use to the =ociety 5ut %n efficient 'ut dishonest one is ositively d%ngerous A ?em'er h%s to develo the ower of %n%lysis %nd %ssessment This is ossi'le 'y
h%rd work Wit %nd temer%ment in the court As you know it is necess%ry to h%ve sufficient m%teri%l for writing % order *n order to collect good m%teri%l for the order it is necess%ry to 'e %tient %nd witty in the Court oom 8ne h%s to 'e c%reful in m%king rem%rks in the court An eminent 5%rrister of ?%dr%s '%r ?r Iort%n w%s %rguing 'efore %n -nglish Judge %t the ?%dr%s high Court Judge w%s short temered %nd c%ustic in his rem%rks, After he%ring ?r Iort%n for some time, the Judge o'served th%t wh%tever ?r Iort%n w%s su'mitting entered his one e%r %nd went out of the other ?r Iort%n romtly resonded 'y s%ying th%t it is 'ound to 'e so unless there w%s something in 'etween to ret%in it The we%on of wit h%s therefore to 'e utiliEed with c%re %nd c%ution in the course of he%ring of % c%se The ?em'ers should h%ve %n %mi%'le temer%ment while writing % Judgment %nd conducting the Court *n my ersective, the following %re the form%l %rts of % 1udgment 34 Title I%me of the 5ench I%me of the ?em'ers 2 I%me of the %rties F I%me of the Advoc%tes %e%ring for the %rties . +e%ding 8rder 5rief f%cts of the C%se 0 Decision 3 :%cts in 'rief cont%ining contentions r%ised 'y the %rties, '%ckground giving rise to disute 'efore the 5ench :%ct in issue oints of dis%greement 'etween the %rties oints to 'e determined 'y the 5ench -v%lu%tion of issues of f%cts discussion of evidence roduced 'efore the Authorities %nd 5ench 'y the %rties %nd ev%lu%tion with the hel of contentions %dv%nced 'y the reresent%tives of the %rties *ssues on l%w oints ?ention or % cit%tion of % relev%nt l%w or rule 4 rule of interret%tion %lied reference of c%se l%w ut forth 'y the %dvoc%tes of the
%rties r%tio decidendi 'inding on the 5ench 8er%tive order Alic%'le l%w or f%cts roved decision on f%cts in issue with re%sons therefor cle%r order to the %rties Costs of the c%se, if %ny D%te of ronouncement of the order =ign%ture of the ?em'ers
