Case Law Details
Md. Abul Kalam Vs Union of India (Gauhati High Court)
It is trite, though of great significance that if any oral argument is advanced, only the Judge who had heard can appreciate the nuances of the case, the evidence adduced, based on oral arguments submitted by the parties or through the counsel. Naturally if hearing was conducted by a Judge who for any reason could not deliver the judgment, the new Judge who succeeds him would be deprived of the benefits of the oral arguments submitted by the party/through counsel and as this practice also in tune with the principle of fair play and justice, if for any reason the Judge demits office or is transferred before delivering judgment, when the new Judge takes over, the new Judge ought to hear again the parties or through the counsel before delivery of judgment.
Oral arguments are important ingredients of the justice delivery system in our jurisprudence. The party or the counsel at the time of making oral submission can explain the various facets of the evidence which have been adduced and clarify any doubt that may arise on account of the objection raised by the opposite party or by the Court as the case may be, and thus enables a party to put one’s case succinctly, clearly on the basis of evidence so adduced.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
