Dismissed

Balbir Singh and Ors. v. Jagtar Singh and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC22 Mar 2012CR/1818/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision petition challenged an order rejecting an application to frame an additional issue during an appeal. The High Court dismissed the revision, characterizing the application as luxury litigation filed four years after evidence closure and noting it would result in a re-trial despite the evidence already being on record.

What did the court decide?

The present petition challenging the order rejecting the application is dismissed.

Balbir Singh and Ors. Vs Jagtar Singh and Ors. — Property and Title | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

Civil Revision No. 1818 of 2012 [1]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

Civil Revision No. 1818 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision: 22.3.2012

¶4

Balbir Singh and others

¶5

.. Petitioners

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Jagtar Singh and others

¶8

.. Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL

¶10

Present: Mr. P. K. Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶11

Rajesh Bindal J.

¶12

Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 21.2.2012, passed by the learned court below, whereby the application filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs for framing of additional issue at the appellate stage was rejected.

¶13

It is a case in which the petitioners filed a suit for declaration to the effect that being legal heirs of deceased-Puna Devi widow of late Kirpa Ram, they were entitled to succeed the property detailed in the suit. It was filed on 3.11.1997. The issues were framed on 24.2.1999. The suit was partly decreed by the trial court vide judgment and decree dated 14.5.2007. Aggrieved against the judgment and decree of the trial court, the petitioners-plaintiffs preferred appeal before the learned lower appellate court. It was filed on 12.6.2007. During the pendency thereof, an application was filed for framing of additional issue on 2.1.2012, which was dismissed by the impugned order.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the issue, which is sought to be framed, is material for decision of the real dispute between the parties. The pleadings to that effect are available on record. Even if the same was taken in the replication already filed, it being part of

¶15

Civil Revision No. 1818 of 2012 [2]

¶16

the pleadings, the issue pertaining to that should have been framed. It was the duty of the court to have framed the right issues.

¶17

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, I do not find any merit in the submissions made. No doubt, it is the duty of the court to frame issues. In case any party is aggrieved by the issues framed by the court, he has to avail of his remedies immediately thereafter. In the present case, it looks like a luxury litigation. The suit was filed on 3.11.1997. The issues were framed on 24.2.1999. Both the parties led their evidence being happy with the issues already framed by the court. The suit was finally decided on 14.5.2007. As it was partly decreed in favour of the petitionersplaintiffs, they preferred appeal on 12.6.2007. It remained pending for a period of more than four years when the application in question for framing of additional issue was filed, the result of which will be that the dispute will be re-opened and re-trial will commence. It is not that evidence pertaining to the issue, which is sought to be framed at this late stage, is already there and it is only for the purpose of recording of finding by the court that some issues are required to be re-framed.

¶18

Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.

¶19

( Rajesh Bindal ) Judge

¶20

22.3.2012 mk

Balbir Singh and Ors. v. Jagtar Singh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balbir Singh and Ors. v. Jagtar Singh and Ors.

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

Brinda Walia and Ors. Vs Kuldip Kaur and Ors.

Gram Panchayat Bucholi Vs Sube Singh and Ors.

M/S S.K. Engineering Works and Anr. Vs Gurdip Singh and Ors.

Narender Vs State Bank of India and Ors.

Tara Chand and Ors. Vs Dharampal

Hoshiyar Singh & Anr. Vs Hazari Lal & Anr.