PABBATI SHANKARAIAH Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER A WARD WARANGAL
LAWS(APH)-1972-8-22
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on August 30,1972

PABBATI SHANKARAIAH Appellant
VERSUS
INCOME-TAX OFFICER, A-WARD, WARANGAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) These writ petitions were heard by late Justice Vaidya on 19-4-1972 and 20-4-1972 and he reserved judgment. It appears that he dictated this judgment at home to the shorthand writer and the judgment was duly typed. But unfortunately before he could pronounce the judgment in open Court, Justice Vaidya passed away. The matter was placed before me for pronouncing the judgment prepared by late Justice Vaidya. As I however felt some doubt about the feasibility of such a course, I heard the counsel on both sides on this aspect of the matter. Having considered the matter carefully in the light of their submissions, I have very reluctantly come to the conclusion for the reasons set out below that it is not permissible for me to pronounce the judgment which was dictated at home by Justice Vaidya before his death. It may also be stated that the judgment typed according to his dictation was not signed by him, as it is the usual practice for a Judge in the case of a reserved judgment to read the judgment in open Court on a day fixed for that purpose after giving notice to counsel on both sides and to sigh the judgment after pronouncing the same in open Court.
(2.) Proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution are governed by Rules made by the High Court under that Article. Among those rules there are none relating to the pronouncing of judgments. Rule 20 however states that all other rules relating to causes and matters coming before the appellate side of the High Court will apply to writ petitions and writ appeals in so far as they are not inconsistent with these rules.
(3.) Order XLI, Rule 31 of the Civil Procedure Code deals with the contents, date and signature of judgments in regards to appeals from original decrees. Inter alia the rule provides that the judgment of the Appellate Court shall be in writing and where the presiding Judge is special empowered by the High Court to pronounce his judgment by dictation to a shorthand-writer in open Court the transcript of the judgment so pronounced shall, after such revision as may be deemed necessary, be signed by the Judges. Order XLI (A) however says that Order XLI Rule 31 shall not apply to the High Court. If a judgment is given orally, the shorthand, notes thereof shall be taken by an Officer of the Court, and the transcript made by him shall be signed or initialled by the Judge or Judges concurring, thereunder after making such corrections as may be considered necessary. Order XLI (A) Rule (A) (1) provides that the rules contained in Order XLI shall apply to appeals in the High Court of Judicature with the modifications contained in this order. Thus it is seen from the provisions of Order XLI A Rule (1) Rule 14 (Order ELI A Rule 14 ?) read with Rule 20 of the Rules framed under Article 226, that there is no specific provision as to what is to happen in the case of judgment which is reserved and which is dictated thereafter by the learned Judge and typed and the Judge unfortunately dies before he pronounces the judgment in open Court without signing the judgment.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.