Dismissed

Bishambar Singh v. Mahazir Hasan

Allahabad HC17 Jan 2019SAPL/485/1991

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This second appeal against dismissal of a suit seeking permanent injunction to restrain meat transport on a public way near a temple was disposed of on merits. The court found no error in the concurrent findings of fact below and held no substantial question of law arose.

What did the court decide?

The plaintiff's appeal was dismissed, affirming the lower courts' judgment dismissing the original suit.

Bishambar Singh Vs Mahazir Hasan — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 22

¶2

Case :- SECOND APPEAL No. - 485 of 1991

¶3

Appellant :- Bishambar Singh Respondent :- Mahazir Hasan Counsel for Appellant :- H.S. Nigam,S.S. Nigam

¶4

Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Alok Kumar Srivastava, Advocate holding brief of Sri S.S. Nigam, counsel for the appellant.

¶6

This is a plaintiff's appeal against the judgment and decree dated 28.11.1988 passed by the trial court dismissing Original Suit No. 225 of 1987 and the judgment and decree dated 1.12.1990 passed by the lower appellate court in Civil Appeal No. 134 of 1988 whereby the lower appellate court had affirmed the judgment passed by the trial court and dismissed the appeal filed by the plaintiffs.

¶7

Original Suit No. 225 of 1987 was instituted by the plaintiffs under Order 1 Rule 8 CPC in a representative capacity claiming to represent the members of the Hindu Community residing in the village with a prayer for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants as well as other members of the Muslim Community from using the public way, existing in front of the Shiv Mandir, for the purpose of transporting meat/flesh of sacrificial animals. The cause of action stated in the plaint for instituting the aforesaid Original Suit No. 225 of 1987 was that the defendant-respondents had threatened the plaintiffs that they shall use the public way to transport meat and flesh of sacrificial animals and not from the other roads which could have been used by the defendants to transport the meat.

¶8

In their impugned judgments, the trial court as well as lower appellate court, after considering the evidence on record, have recorded a finding that the plaintiffs were not able to prove the cause of action for instituting the Original Suit No. 225 of 1987 and had also not been able to establish that any civil right vested in them so as to exclude the defendants from using the public way. The courts below have recorded a finding that the defendants had the right to use the public way.

¶9

I do not find any error either in the reasons recorded by the courts below or any perversity in the findings of the courts below. The findings by the courts below in their impugned judgments are concurrent findings of fact. No substantial question of law arises in the present second appeal and, therefore, the present appeal is not liable to be admitted under Section 100 CPC.

¶10

The appeal is dismissed .

¶11

Order Date :- 17.1.2019 Satyam

Bishambar Singh v. Mahazir Hasan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bishambar Singh v. Mahazir Hasan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Sunita Vs Purshottam

Nanak Chand Gupta and Others Vs Sri Dipti Ram

Ajay Pratap Rai and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramesh Chand Vs Janaki Prasad

Ehsan Ali Khan Vs Inayat Ali Khan and Another

Dharam Singh Vs U.P.S.E.B.