Partly allowed

Vijendra v. Puran Mal and Ors.

Rajasthan HC22 Jul 2016CMA/201/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court partly allowed the appeal and cross objections, quashing the Tribunal's award on specific issues due to inadequate appreciation of facts and grounds. The matter was remanded to the Tribunal for a fresh hearing with notice to all parties, who were directed to appear on 5.10.2016.

What did the court decide?

The appeal and cross objections are partly allowed; the Tribunal's award on specific issues is quashed and remanded for fresh hearing with notice to all parties, appearing on 5.10.2016.

Vijendra Vs Puran Mal and Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR.

¶3

J U D G M E N T S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.201/2001 (Vijendra Versus Puran Mal & Anr.)

¶4

S.B. Civil Cross Objection No. 26/2014 In S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.201/2001

¶5

DATE OF JUDGMENT : 22.07.2016

¶6

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

¶7

Mr. Anil Jain, counsel for the appellant Mr. Vizzy Agarwal, counsel for the Cross objector

¶8

Since both appeal as well as cross objections have been filed against the judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal, hence the arguments have been heard together and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, they are being decided finally at this stage.

¶9

At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant(s) submits that the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned judgment and award has not taken into consideration the grounds which he has raised by way of aforesaid appeal(s). The finding of learned Tribunal on issue no. 2 & 4 is contrary to the material available on record. Thus, the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal qua aforesaid issue(s) be quashed and set aside and the matter should be remanded to the learned Tribunal with the direction to decide the matter afresh qua aforesaid issue(s) in the light of grounds which he has raised by way of aforesaid appeal(s).

¶10

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents has contended that they have also filed the cross objections challenging the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. The finding of the Tribunal on issue no. 2 & 4 is contrary to the record. He has requested that the learned Tribunal may be directed to hear him/them at the time of deciding the matter afresh on the aforesaid issue/s, and he may be

¶11

¶12

permitted to raise grounds, as have been raised in their cross objections.

¶13

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record including the impugned judgment and award.

¶14

In my considered view, the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned judgment and award has not appreciated the facts of the case and the grounds raised by the learned counsel for the respective parties by way of the aforesaid appeal(s) as well as the cross objection(s) in a proper manner and passed the impugned judgment and award surreptitiously. Thus, the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal needs interference by this court.

¶15

In the result, the appeal(s) is/are partly allowed; the impugned judgment and award passed by learned Tribunal qua aforesaid issue(s) is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal with the direction to decide the matter afresh qua aforesaid issue(s) as early as possible, in the light of grounds raised by the learned counsel for the respective parties by way of the aforesaid appeal(s) as well as the cross objection(s) and the judgment(s) to be cited by learned counsel for the parties, if any, after issuing notice to all the concerned parties and giving opportunity of hearing to them.

¶16

Both the parties have requested for a specific date for their appearance before the Tribunal, hence they are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 5.10.2016.

¶17

The cross objections also stand disposed of accordingly.

¶18

Record, if any, be sent back.

¶19

(MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA)J.

¶20

All corrections made in the judgment / order have been incorporated in the judgment / order being E-mailed.

¶21

¶22

Dilip Khandelwal PA

Vijendra v. Puran Mal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijendra v. Puran Mal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dal Jeet Singh and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

National Insurance Comp Ltd. Vs Rajendra Yadav and Ors.

Yashpal Vs State

Bhanwar Lal Vaishnav Vs U O I and Ors.

Smt Vandana Saxena and Ors. Vs Ram Chand and Ors.

Hajari and Ors. Vs M/S Ashnil Movers Limited and