Reasoned judicial orders are mandatory: non-speaking relief order set aside and matter remitted for fresh merits-based adjudication.

A judicial order affecting rights must disclose reasons and the basis for granting or refusing relief; a non-speaking order is liable to be set aside because it prejudices the parties and undermines the administration of justice. The Tribunal found that the impugned order merely restrained recovery and adjourned the matter without recording reasons or merits-based findings. It therefore set aside the order and remitted the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for fresh consideration on merits after giving the parties due opportunity.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the impugned non-speaking order of the Adjudicating Authority was liable to be set aside for want of reasons and the matter remanded for fresh decision.

Analysis: The order under challenge merely directed the bank not to recover the amount and adjourned the matter without recording any reasons or merits-based findings. The Tribunal held that recording reasons is an essential feature of the dispensation of justice and that a judicial order must disclose the basis on which relief is granted or refused. An unreasoned order was found to cause prejudice and to undermine the proper administration of justice.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Adjudicating Authority for fresh consideration on merits after giving the parties due opportunity.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the challenged order was annulled, and the proceeding was sent back for reconsideration in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: A judicial order that affects rights must contain reasons, and a non-speaking order passed without reasons is liable to be set aside and remanded for fresh adjudication.

---