Partly allowed

Parmanand v. Dharmpal and Others

Rajasthan HC4 Jul 2016CMA/6427/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal, the High Court partly allowed the appeal, quashing the Tribunal's award on specific issues. The court found the award surreptitious and directed a fresh decision after giving parties a hearing opportunity, fixing the next date as 5.10.2016.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment and award on issues 3 and 4 quashed and set aside; matter remanded to Tribunal to decide afresh after issuing notice and hearing parties.

Parmanand Vs Dharmpal and Others — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

¶2

AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR.

¶3

J U D G M E N T

¶4

S.B.Civil Misc. Appeal No.6427/2011 Parmanand Vs. Dharampal Yadav & Ors.

¶5

4.7.2016

¶6

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

¶7

Mr. A.K. Pareek for appellant/s Mr. Rajpal Choudhary for the respondent/s

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the parties and after hearing both the parties, this appeal is being disposed of at this stage.

¶9

Brief facts of the case are that this appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and award under appeal.

¶10

At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant/s submits that the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned award has not taken into consideration the objections which he has raised by way of aforesaid appeal. The finding of learned Tribunal on

¶11

issue No/s. 3 and 4 is contrary to the material available on record. Thus, the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal qua issue No/s.3 and 4 be quashed and set aside and the matter be remanded to the learned Tribunal with the direction to decide the matter afresh in the light of objections which he has raised by way of aforesaid appeal.

¶12

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent/s, though opposed the same but 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 permitted to raise all the objections, grounds as have been raised in this appeal.

¶13

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

¶14

In my considered view, the learned

¶15

Tribunal while passing the impugned award has not gone through the facts of the case and passed the impugned award surreptitiously. Thus, the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal needs interference by this court.

¶16

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned judgment and award passed by learned Tribunal qua issue No/s. 3 and 4 is quashed and set aside with the direction to the learned Tribunal to decide the matter afresh as early as possible, qua issue No/s. 3 and 4 in the light of grounds raised by the learned counsel for the parties in the aforesaid appeal and the aforesaid judgment, if applicable and other judgments 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.

¶17

Both the parties request for specific date for appearing before the trial court, hence

¶18

they are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 5.10.2016. Record, if any, be sent back.

¶19

(MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA)J.

¶20

Sharma NK

¶21

All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being e- mailed. - NK Sharma, PS

Parmanand v. Dharmpal and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parmanand v. Dharmpal and Others

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

Shambhu Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Dinesh Kumar Saini Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Charan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Subedar and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Jabbar Mohammad Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Yadram Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp