DB observes that it is a case of breach of Judicial Discipline and Hierarchy
In a extremely rare rebuke, a Division Bench of High Court of Delhi sitting in Appeal has severely castigated the Single Judge for his this “adventure”,
DB reminded the Single Judge that “Judicial discipline and propriety attached to the Court requires that a Single Judge Bench should mandatorily follow the decision of a Division Bench of the same Court as the Single Bench is legally bound by it.
What Single Judge did is that while claiming that he is donning the hat of a “student of law”, earlier this year, he severely criticised a Division Bench order and ended up recording his difference of opinion.
The Division Bench in Delhi headed by Justice B D Ahmed with Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva was constrained to observe that hierarchical system of the High Court must be followed strictly.
It is all the more imperative when the Division Bench decision is passed by an Appellate Court and the Single Bench happens to be just a Trial Court.”
The DB also wondered as to why at the first place “such a totally futile and fruitless ‘academic exercise’ was undertaken” by the Single Judge.
Why he criticised a bigger Bench verdict while simultaneously ruing that frivolous petitions have flooded his docket eating court hours.
In April a Single Bench of Justice Vipin Sanghi, was hearing a plea on Territorial Jurisdiction of a Trade Mark case.
He wrapped up proceedings and reserved orders. In the mean time it then came across a Division Bench judgment that had been not placed by the disputing parties before it while the hearing was underway.
The Single Judge in his final order referred to the DB ruling and also declared it had absolutely no relevance to the case pending before him.
He criticised the DB ruling in the name of being a “a student of law” and observed that the two judge Bench had “overlooked material facts” and “has not appreciated factual context” in their referred verdict.
The larger bench was not amused at this antics of Single Bench and observed that it is “indeed unfortunate that the learned Single Judge undertook this adventure of recording the disagreement with the decision, in the name of being a student of law.”
The DB further clarified that “Once it is legally recognized that the decision of the Division Bench is legally binding on the Single Judge of the same court, there was absolutely no need at all to express or record any disagreement, difference of opinion or to even suggest that the decision of the Division Bench may need further re-consideration.” TOI
Related News @ LatestLaws.com-