Supreme Court, in the case of Sunita Agrawal v. Bhanwarlal & Anr., stated that the approach of Article 136 of the Constitution cannot be adopted while deciding petitions by the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitutions of India. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
In this case, the High Court passed an impugned order without reflecting the reasons and the contention of the parties. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The court further stated that even though it is not necessary to record elaborate reasons but when these kinds of matters are being carried to Supreme Court, proper reasons have to be recorded so that the Court is able to understand the reasons due to which the judge has dismissed the petition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Therefore, the Supreme Court set aside the impugned order and remitted back the matter for the reconsideration of the High Court so that this time, the court can record the reasons, however brief they are and directed that the matter should be heard by another Judge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
At the same time, the Supreme Court stated that since the matter is remitted back to the High Court, Article 136 cannot be approached.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court, in the case of Sunita Agrawal v. Bhanwarlal & Anr., stated that the approach of Article 136 of the Constitution cannot be adopted while deciding petitions by the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitutions of India. In this case, the High Court passed an impugned order without reflecting the reasons and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":177,"featured_media":8365,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1399,26],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n