Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Bharat Petroleum Corpn Ltd vs Lalman R. Sharma & Ors

Supreme Court9 March 2011Deepak Verma · Dalveer Bhandari

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

A writ petition judgment passed by the High Court without affording the opposite party an opportunity to file a reply is vitiated by breach of the principles of natural justice, and such a judgment must be set aside and the matter remitted for reconsideration on the merits after the opposite party has been given a fair opportunity to present its case.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.2408 OF 2011(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(C.)NO.12229 OF 2010)

BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPN.LTD. ... APPELLANT

VERSUS

LALMAN R. SHARMA & ORS. ... RESPONDENTS

O R D E R

Leave granted.

We have heard Mr.G.E.Vahanvati, learned Attorney General

for India appearing for the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and

Mr.Aniruddha Rajput, learned counsel for the respondents.

The main grievance which has been articulated by learned

Attorney General for India is that the impugned judgment has been

passed without giving any opportunity to the appellant herein-

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. to file its reply. In other words,

the case of the appellant has not even been considered before

passing the impugned judgment/order. We see considerable force in

this submission. Consequently, the impugned order/judgment dated

25.01.2010 passed in Writ Petition No.952 of 2009 is set aside and

the matter is remitted to the High Court for deciding it in

accordance with law, after taking into consideration the reply of

the appellant herein.

: 2 :

Since the matter has been pending here for quite some

time, we request the High Court to decide it expeditiously.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

...................J. (DALVEER BHANDARI)

...................J. (DEEPAK VERMA)

NEW DELHI;

9TH MARCH, 2011

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free