Natural justice requires a real chance to rebut the other side's submissions before an appellate order is made.

An appellate order was found unsustainable because the petitioner was denied a real and effective opportunity to rebut the respondent's submissions. A fair hearing requires more than a formal hearing of one side; it includes the right to answer and contest the opposing party's arguments, even where no new facts are introduced. As the petitioner was absent when the respondent was heard and was not allowed to respond, the proceeding failed the basic requirement of natural justice. The order was therefore set aside for breach of natural justice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate order was liable to be set aside for violation of natural justice on the ground that the petitioner was not afforded an effective opportunity to rebut the respondent's submissions.

Analysis: The requirement of hearing the other side is not satisfied by a mere formal hearing of one party alone. A fair hearing includes the opportunity to answer and rebut the contentions raised by the opposite side, even if no new facts are introduced. Since the petitioner was not present when the respondent's arguments were heard and was denied a chance to respond, the proceeding did not conform to the basic requirement of natural justice.

Conclusion: The appellate order was unsustainable and was set aside for breach of natural justice.

Ratio Decidendi: An adjudicatory authority must afford both parties a real and effective opportunity of hearing, including a meaningful chance to rebut the opponent's submissions; denial of such opportunity vitiates the order.

---