LAWS(SC)-1989-4-62

M R NARAYANAN Vs. V MOHANLAL

Decided On April 12, 1989
M R Narayanan Appellant
V/S
V Mohanlal Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) In this matter when the appeal was heard by the High court, it appears that the counsel for the appellant and also the appellant werenot present. The learned judge, therefore, proceeded to dispose of the matter ex party without any opportunity to the appellant of being heard. Subsequently an application was submitted by the counsel and later on by the party also for re-hearing of the appeal. Unfortunately, the learned judge by a short order rejected the prayer and maintained his original order.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it appears to us that the High court was not justified in rejecting the prayer for re-hearing. The appellant appears to have engaged a counsel who was not afforded an opportunity of hearing. That apart, there was no proper assistance to the High court when it disposed of the revision petition. There is no reason for hustling through in a matter where serious questions affecting the rights of parties arise for determination. The High court should not give that impression to the litigant public.