Proper reasoning is heartbeat of judgments, makes remedy of appeal meaningful: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court recently stressed on the importance of courts providing grounds and reasons for an order, while stating that proper reasoning is the heartbeat of court orders [Ayeshaben v Huriben Ismail Ali]..Justice Ashokkumar C Joshi said that reasoned orders further the cause of justice, help avoid uncertainties, and make the remedy of appeal meaningful.“Lack of reasons introduces an element of uncertainty, dissatisfaction and give entirely different dimensions to the questions of law raised before the higher/appellate courts,” the single-Judge stated..The Court was hearing an appeal against an order of an Additional District Judge condoning a delay on 2 years and 5 months in filing of an execution petition.The petitioners stated that the grounds for delay were not germane, and no sufficient cause was shown for condonation of delay. However, the respondents said that the reasons in the appeal were rightly held to be true and genuine..While finding that if sufficient cause is shown, courts should generally condone delay, the High Court held that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the discretion by the trial court was rightly exercised in order to advance substantial justice..Before parting with the judgment, Justice Joshi noted that the order under challenge recorded submissions of parties but did not record detailed reasoning for the decision arrived at..It was clarified that detailed reasoning did not entail unwarranted repetition and can be summed up in a few lines also, but must go to the root of the controversy.The judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in State of Rajasthan v. Rajendra Prasad Jain was discussed, in which it was observed that, "reason is the heartbeat of every conclusion, and without the same it becomes lifeless.".The judge elaborated that not providing reasoning in support of judicial orders was impermissible, but brief reasoning would suffice in order to meet ends of justice, and would render the remedy of appeal purposeful.Despite these observations, since the Court agreed with the final conclusion, the order under challenge was left undisturbed. However, a copy of this order was directed to be circulated amongst all judges of the district judiciary for future reference..Advocate Varun G Rai appeared for the petitioners while the respondents were represented by advocate Faimuddin Saiyed..[Read Order]