Brevity is a virtue the courts may follow “as far as possible” while writing their decisions, the Supreme Court has said.

The three-page order containing just five paragraphs, with the last one merely a line, by a Bench of Justices A.M. Sapre and Indu Malhotra was based on a recent Shimla High Court order merely remanding a case to another court — the High Court consumed 60 pages to convey its point.

“We cannot resist observing that having rightly formed an opinion to remand the case to the first appellate court, there was no need for the High Court to devote 60 pages in writing the impugned order. In our view, it was not required,” Justices Sapre and Malhotra noted in their short order.

However, the apex court decided not to intervene in the High Court’s reasoning to remand the case.

“An order of remand, in our opinion, in the facts of this case, does not call for any interference. It is more so when in the opinion of the High Court a case of remand was made out,” the apex court agreed with the High Court’s finding in the case which is a private civil matter between appellant Surjeet Singh and respondent Sadhu Singh. The first appellate court has been asked to hear the appeal afresh along with any cross-objections as per their merit.

But the apex court could not resist a parting shot at the High Court’s verbosity. The Bench said there was no need for the High Court to cite “several decisions and that too in detail” in a case of mere remand.

“The examination could be confined only to the issue of remand and not beyond it,” the Supreme Court suggested, adding that “brevity being a virtue, it must be observed as far as possible while expressing an opinion”.