Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes Trial Court's Non-Speaking Order in Civil Case

High Court Directs Trial Court to Reassess Applications on Merits Within 60 Days

News Report: 

In a significant judgment, the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench, presided over by Justice Shri Alok Awasthi, has quashed the non-speaking order passed by a Trial Court in the case of Parameshwari Developers Pvt. Ltd. versus Suresh and Others. The judgment, delivered on September 15, 2025, emphasizes the importance of judicial responsibility and mandates the Trial Court to reconsider applications on their merits, ensuring due process is followed.

The case involved a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the Trial Court's order dated April 21, 2025. The Trial Court had rejected several applications filed under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, in a clerical manner, citing the absence of the plaintiff and counsel. This rejection, without merit-based consideration, was deemed by the High Court as an abdication of judicial duty.

In its judgment, the High Court stressed that the improper arrangement of court files should not penalize the concerned parties. It underscored the duty of the court staff to maintain orderly files and the responsibility of the Presiding Officer to oversee this process. The High Court highlighted that a non-speaking order, which fails to address the merits of the case, is impermissible.

Justice Awasthi directed the Trial Court to reassess the pending applications, offering the petitioner an opportunity for a hearing, and to resolve these applications based on their merits within 60 days from receiving the certified copy of the High Court's order. This directive aims to ensure justice is delivered fairly and comprehensively, upholding the principles of judicial accountability and transparency.

The High Court's decision underscores the judiciary's role in safeguarding due process and reinforces the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution. Copies of the judgment have been dispatched to the concerned Trial Court and the Principal District Judge for compliance and information.

This ruling serves as a reminder of the judiciary's obligation to deliver reasoned judgments and reinforces the significance of procedural propriety in judicial proceedings.

Bottom Line:

Trial Court's non-speaking order rejecting applications due to absence of plaintiff and counsel without merit-based consideration is an abdication of judicial duty. Such rejection cannot be based on improper arrangement of Court's files, which is not the fault of the party concerned. 

Statutory provision(s): Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Order 1 Rule 10, Constitution of India Article 227

Parameshwari Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Suresh, (Madhya Pradesh)(Indore) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2781318