Supreme Court Calls for Curbing Unnecessary Litigations from Court Remands

The Supreme Court emphasizes minimizing unnecessary remands that lead to prolonged litigation. It reversed an Allahabad High Court decision, which had ordered a fresh consideration in a matter involving correction of a revenue map. The apex court highlighted misinterpretation of Section 30 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006.

The Supreme Court has stressed the importance of avoiding unnecessary remands by higher courts that trigger renewed rounds of litigation. This observation came as Justices Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan overturned an Allahabad High Court order, which had remanded a revenue map correction case for fresh evaluation.

The top court found the High Court's decision to be grounded in a flawed interpretation of Section 30 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006. This section pertains to the updation and maintenance of maps and records. The Supreme Court reasoned that such remands could instigate further legal disputes, diverging from its own evolving precedents on natural justice.

The case in question involved an application for correcting a revenue map, initially dismissed by both the collector and the Additional Commissioner. Attempts to reopen the issue after 17 years led to the High Court's intervention. The Supreme Court, however, determined the matter had been long settled and set aside the High Court's order.

(With inputs from agencies.)