9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (6) TMI 514X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot;The only prayer of the petitioner at this stage is that the present matter be disposed of by the respondents by keeping in mind the order of this Court appended as Annexure P-7 with application. We accordingly issue a direction to the respondents that necessary exercise be completed within a period of four months from the date that a certified copy of this order is supplied to them." Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the High Court without indicating as to how the order of the High Court in an earlier case in Ramesh Chand and Ors. v. The Registrar- cum-Deputy Commissioner, Jind & Ors. i.e C.W.P. No.14360 of 2005 had any relevance so far as the dispute raised by the respondent No.1 before it. According to him the judgme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it may become necessary for judges to embark into lengthy discussions but the discussion is meant to explain and not to define. Judges interpret statutes, they do not interpret judgments. They interpret words of statutes; their words are not to be interpreted as statutes. In London Graving Dock Co. Ltd. v. Horton (1951 AC 737 at p.761), Lord Mac Dermot observed: "The matter cannot, of course, be settled merely by treating the ipsissima vertra of Willes, J as though they were part of an Act of Parliament and applying the rules of interpretation appropriate thereto. This is not to detract from the great weight to be given to the language actually used by that most distinguished judge." In Home Office v. Dorset Yacht Co. (1970 (2) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the path of justice, but you must cut the dead wood and trim off the side branches else you will find yourself lost in thickets and branches. My plea is to keep the path to justice clear of obstructions which could impede it." As noted above, the High Court has not even discussed as to how the decision in Ramesh Chand's case (supra) had any similarity to the facts of the present case. In the aforesaid background we set aside the order of the High Court and remit the matter for a fresh hearing in accordance with law. We make it clear we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that similar cases are pending in the High Court awaiting decision in this case. Therefore, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
