S. PALANISAMY vs P.R. SENNIAPPAN .

The Supreme Court emphasized the need for judicial officers to use temperate language in their judgments, particularly when referring to colleagues in the judiciary. The Court noted that adverse remarks made against a judicial officer, which were previously overturned, should not remain in court records as they can tarnish reputations. The judgment reiterated that intemperate language can reflect a lack of judicial poise and balance, and judges should exercise restraint in their comments to uphold the dignity of the judiciary.