The High Court allowed a criminal appeal after the District Court raised time limitation suo motu and struck out a revision without hearing the parties.
The first appellate court's order for a DNA test was a nullity because it was made suo motu without affording the parties the right to be heard, violating principles of natural justice.
The Court of Appeal quashed a High Court judgment for deciding a new issue suo motu without hearing the parties, and remitted the case for a fresh judgment.
The High Court allowed an appeal after holding that the trial court raised issues suo motu and decided them without hearing the parties, violating the right to be heard.
The High Court quashed a District Land and Housing Tribunal decision for raising limitation sua sponte without hearing the parties and ordered a fresh hearing.
The trial court committed a fundamental procedural error by deciding the case on issues raised suo motu at the judgment stage without affording the parties an opportunity to be heard, thereby violating the right to a fair hearing and natural justice. The judgment and order striking out the plaint are nullified.
The DLHT's judgment was a nullity because it raised and determined the issue of non-joinder of a necessary party suo motu without hearing the parties and failed to ensure the assessors' opinions were read to the parties as required by law. The application for revision was incompetent, but the court addressed the substantive errors to prevent recurrence.
The High Court allowed a land appeal, holding that a tribunal that raises locus standi on its own must hear the parties first and must nullify prior proceedings if the suit was incompetent.