Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute Properties Acquired By Gift During Marriage Remain Separate Property Of Spouse Under French Civil Code; Husband Entitled To Half Share Only In Community Assets: Madras High Court Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Closure Of Human Trafficking Complaint, Flags Lack Of Bona Fides Access To Justice Cannot Be Denied When Tribunal Is Not Functioning': Calcutta High Court Holds Writ Maintainable Under Article 226 Amid Stalled Conciliation Proceedings Violation Of Natural Justice Overrides Bar On Maintainability Under Section 18 MSMED Act: Orissa High Court Panic In A Train Does Not Mean Self-Destruction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants ₹8 Lakh Compensation For Passenger's Death In Stampede Section 101 JJ Act | Date Of Knowledge Of Order, Not Mere Knowledge Of Disposal, Commences Limitation Period: Delhi High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Order Declaring Inam Land As Govt Property Without Determining Occupancy Rights Proviso To Section 125(3) CrPC Does Not Limit Enforcement Of Monetary Relief Orders Under Section 20 DV Act: Telangana High Court Regularization Of Deviation Within Permissible Plot Envelope Governed By Uniform Fee Schedule, Arbitrary 5X Penalty Unsustainable: J&K&L High Court Man Who Blackmailed Woman With Her Own Nude Photos To Rape Her Repeatedly Can't Escape Conviction Merely Because His Voice Sample Wasn't Taken: Delhi High Court Arbitration Clause In Sale Agreement Cannot Be Invoked If Subject Matter Involves Third-Party Title Disputes: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Errs In Dismissing Amendment Plea If New Facts Emerge From Written Statement: Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Compensation For Own Wrong': Gujarat High Court Rules Tortfeasors & Legal Heirs Cannot Claim Motor Accident Damages Under Section 166 MV Act Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Police And Magistrates Over Illegal Remand Of Juvenile Accused Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) Hindu Marriage Act | Spouse Seeking Divorce On Grounds Of Cruelty And Desertion Must Prove Allegations With Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Cannot Let Land Become Banjar: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Appointment Of Receiver Under BNSS Amidst Pending Civil Title Disputes Section 8 Arbitration Act | Executing Court Must Refer Parties To Arbitration If Dispute Falls Within Scope Of Compromise Decree: Madhya Pradesh High Court Suit For Damages Arising Out Of Tortious Injury Barred By Limitation If Not Filed Within One Year: Punjab & Haryana High Court 72-Hour Gap Not Proximate: Calcutta High Court Quashes Murder Conviction, Holds 'Last Seen' Theory Inapplicable When Time Gap Is Wide Original Owner Cannot Create Trust Over Property Already Sold; Separate Relief For Title Declaration Not Required: Madras High Court

High Court Stresses Fair Trial in Civil Appeal: Opportunity Has to Be Given to the Parties to Decide the Issue on Merits.

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a notable judgment today, the Andhra Pradesh High Court, under the bench of Hon’ble Dr. Justice K. Manmadha Rao, emphasized the importance of fair trial and opportunity in civil proceedings. The Court set aside an order from a lower court in the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1227 of 2018, underscoring the need for a decision based on merits.

The appeal, filed by M Suguna Devi, contested the dismissal of her application for the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner in I.A.No. 167 of 2017. The lower court had previously dismissed this application, citing intentional delays by the appellant.

Justice Rao, in his decision, highlighted the criticality of providing fair opportunities to parties involved in legal disputes. He stated, “an opportunity has to be given to the parties to decide the issue on merits for fair disposal.” This statement forms the core philosophy of the judgment, which reinstates the fundamental principles of justice and fairness in judicial proceedings.

The case revolved around procedural contentions where the appellant’s representation was allegedly not heard adequately due to the absence of her senior counsel on the scheduled date. The High Court’s intervention rectifies this by directing the lower court to restore I.A.No. 167 of 2017 and to ensure its disposal based on the merits of the case, within a specified four-week period.

Legal experts view this judgment as a reinforcement of the principles of natural justice, especially the right to a fair hearing. The Court’s emphasis on deciding matters on their merits rather than procedural technicalities is being seen as a positive step towards ensuring justice is accessible and equitable.

Representing the appellant, Mr. C. Subodh expressed satisfaction with the judgment, noting that it upholds the right to a fair trial. On the other side, Mr. T. Janardhan Rao, representing the respondents, acknowledged the High Court’s directive.

This decision also reflects upon the Court’s consistent approach in civil litigation, focusing on the essence of the matter rather than solely on procedural lapses, thus paving the way for more equitable and just judicial processes.

Date of Decision: 10 November, 2023

M Suguna Devi Versus T Raikab Chand Died

Latest Legal News