Supreme Court of India has emphasized the importance of concise pleadings in appeals brought before it. The court made this observation while considering an appeal filed against a Karnataka High Court decision in the case of Drakshayanamma and others vs. Girish and others.

The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Pankaj Mithal upheld the decision of the Karnataka High Court, which held that a civil suit was not barred by limitation. The court noted that while the plaint, trial court order, and High Court order were succinct at 10 and 6 pages respectively, the synopsis of the appeal submitted to the apex court exceeded 60 pages.

Highlighting the stark difference in length, the court emphasized that parties should refrain from submitting bulky synopses. The justices emphasized that the brevity of orders and pleadings in lower courts should be mirrored in the Supreme Court filings.

The High Court, whose decision was upheld by the apex court, stressed that proper pleadings, the framing of issues related to limitation, and the presentation of evidence are essential before dismissing a suit on grounds of limitation. The High Court had further clarified that the issue of limitation is a nuanced matter involving both factual and legal considerations.

The Supreme Court's ruling on August 21, conveyed through a concise 2-page order, stated that there was no basis for interference under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. While dismissing the Special Leave Petition, the court left the issue of limitation open for future consideration.

This ruling serves as a reminder to legal practitioners and parties involved in appeals to ensure that their submissions are clear, concise, and adhere to the court's guidelines. The Supreme Court's call for succinctness underscores its commitment to expeditious and effective justice delivery.

Case Title: Drakshayanamma and Others vs. Girish and Others