Supreme Court sets aside 'incomprehensible' Himachal HC verdict

Tribune News Service

Satya Prakash

New Delhi, August 4

The Supreme Court has set aside an “utterly incomprehensible” verdict of the Himachal Pradesh High Court as it failed to understand the basis on which the decision was reached.

“The judgment of the High Court is utterly incomprehensible. The reasons on the basis of which the High Court has proceeded to allow the petitions and set aside the reassessment cannot be discerned from the judgments,” a Bench led by Justice DY Chandrachud said, setting aside the impugned judgment of the High Court.

The Bench – which also included Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia – restored the three petitions to the Himachal Pradesh High Court and asked it to decide them afresh. “All the rights and contentions of the parties are kept open,” it said in its August 1 order.

The “utterly incomprehensible” judgment was delivered by a Division Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court on November 27, 2020, allowing writ petitions filed by Himachal Aluminium and Conductors challenging the validity of orders of reassessment passed by the state of Himachal Pradesh. The High Court had set aside the reassessment.

However, hearing an appeal filed by the state against the high court’s judgment, the top court failed to understand the reasons on the basis of which the High Court allowed the petitions and set aside the reassessment.

This is not the first time that the Supreme Court has faced such a problem with a verdict delivered by the high court. In January this year, it had taken exception to a verdict of the high court after it failed to comprehend the language used by it.

“Is this in Latin? We may have to send it back to the High Court for it to be re-written,” a Bench led by Justice KM Joseph had commented. “We are unable to understand a word,” senior advocate Nidhesh Gupta had said, agreeing with Justice Joseph.

In 2017, the top court was forced to set aside a Himachal Pradesh High Court verdict for its sheer inability to comprehend it due to poor quality of language in a tenant-landlord dispute. Such was the quality of the English language used in the high court’s verdict that even the lawyers representing both parties had failed to understand or assist the judges understand it.

Decide 3 petitions afresh, High Court told

The Bench, including Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, restored the three petitions to the Himachal Pradesh High Court and asked it to decide them afresh. “All the rights and contentions of the parties are kept open,” it said in its August 1 order.

About The Author

Tribune News Service

The Tribune News Service brings you the latest news, analysis and insights from the region, India and around the world. Follow the Tribune News Service for a wide-ranging coverage of events as they unfold, with perspective and clarity.

Join Whatsapp Channel of The Tribune for latest updates.

#supreme court