When judgment is pronounced without reasoning, it is not a judgment in the eye of law for the reason that the requirement of reasoning either by Original Court or Appellate Authority is to convey the mind of the judge while deciding such an issue before the Tribunal – Gandhar Oil Refinery (India) Ltd. Vs. City Oil Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

NCLAT held that it is settled law that the Court or Tribunal shall record reasons for its conclusion on the basis of merits. What an order should contain normally is not specified anywhere but the order must be reasoned one since the judgment or order in its final shape usually contains in additional to formal parts (a) A preliminary or introductory part, showing the form of the application upon which it was made, the manner in which and the place at which, the writ or other originating process was served, the parties appearing any consent, waivers, undertakings or admissions given or made, so placed as to indicate whether they relate to the whole judgment or order or only part of it, and a reference to the evidence upon which the judgment or order is based and (b) A substantive or mandatory part, containing the order made by the Court as has been said in Halsbury’s Laws of England (4th Edition, Volume 26 P. 260).

When judgment is pronounced without reasoning, it is not a judgment in the eye of law for the reason that the requirement of reasoning either by Original Court or Appellate Authority is to convey the mind of the judge while deciding such an issue before the Tribunal – Gandhar Oil Refinery (India) Ltd. Vs. City Oil Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »