The High Court for State of Telangana clarifies the exercise of discretion in awarding or dispensing with costs when disposing of writ appeals. The judgment upholds existing precedent, confirming that orders for “no costs” may be made as appropriate to the facts. This outcome provides clear guidance for subordinate courts and practitioners regarding the non-mandatory nature of cost awards in appellate disposal.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WA/1206/2025 of Dr Gyanmudra Vs Birla Mallesh |
| CNR | HBHC010653192025 |
| Date of Registration | 30-10-2025 |
| Decision Date | 31-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED OF NO COSTS |
| Judgment Author | MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR |
| Court | High Court for State of Telangana |
| Bench | MB,J & GPK,J |
| Precedent Value | Binding on subordinate courts within jurisdiction |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within the jurisdiction of the High Court for State of Telangana |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The High Court expressly confirmed that it may dispose of writ appeals “with no costs,” emphasizing judicial discretion on cost orders.
- Lawyers should be prepared for both cost and “no cost” outcomes, and may reference this judgment when arguing for dispensation of costs in appropriate cases.
- The order clarifies that not all disposals require an express cost direction; a “no costs” order is procedurally valid.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Bench, comprising MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, J. and GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, J., disposed of the writ appeals explicitly ordering “no costs.”
- The judgment demonstrates that appellate courts retain full discretion in making, or refusing, cost orders at the time of disposal.
- The separate common judgment reiterates the practice and procedure for passing orders “without costs,” reaffirming that such orders are within the powers of the appellate court and do not affect the merits.
Factual Background
- The present proceedings arose on writ appeals before the High Court for the State of Telangana.
- Both W.A.Nos.1205 and 1206 of 2025 were heard together and disposed of by common judgment.
- The record does not summarize the underlying facts or merits; the order only records the disposal with no costs awarded.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment confirms discretionary powers of the High Court to award or withhold costs in the disposal of appellate proceedings.
- Specific statutory sections or constitutional provisions are not identified in the order.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
- Both judges (MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, J. & GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, J.) concurred in the order.
- No dissenting opinion recorded.
Procedural Innovations
- The judgment affirms established procedure regarding cost orders in disposal of writ appeals.
- There are no new procedural directions, evidence requirements, or guidelines noted in the order.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The judgment upholds existing precedent and practice regarding judicial discretion in awarding or dispensing with costs upon disposal of appeals.