Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

SURJEET SINGH & ANR. ETC. ETC. versus SADHU SINGH & ORS.

Decided
3 December 2018
Judges listed
ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Dismissed

Citations

Official
[2018] 14 S.C.R. 991 ยท 2018 INSC 1136

Cited by

We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

1

Leave granted.

p. 991, margin E

2

These appeals are directed against the final judgment and order dated 24.09.2018 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in C.R. No.182 of 2015 and C.R. No.183 of 2015 whereby the High Court allowed the revision petitions filed by the respondents herein.

p. 991, margin E

3

Having heard the learned counsel for the appellants and on perusal of the record of the case, we find no good ground to interfere in the impugned order because we find that the High Court has only remanded the case to the first Appellate Court to decide the first appeal and cross objection afresh on merits in accordance with law. An order of remand, in our opinion, in the facts of this case, does not call for any interference. It is more so when in the opinion of the High Court a case of remand was made out.

p. 991, margin F

4

Before parting, we cannot resist observing that having rightly formed an opinion to remand the case to the First Appellate Court, there was no need for the High Court to devote 60 pages in writing the impugned order. In our view, it was not required. The examination could be confined only to the issue of remand and not beyond it. At the same time, there was no need to cite several decisions and that too in detail. Brevity being a virtue, it must be observed as far as possible while expressing an opinion.

p. 992

5

The appeals stand dismissed in limine.

p. 992