Prakash Bhati v. R.S.I.D and Investment Corp. Ltd. and Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
In a civil second appeal concerning a partly decreed suit for mandatory injunction, the High Court held that the first appellate court erred in dismissing the suit. Lacking cross-objections from the defendant regarding the dismissal, the appellate court saw no grounds to alter the trial court's decree under Order XLI Rule 22 CPC.
What did the court decide?
The first appellate judgment modified only to delete the observation dismissing the suit; the appellate decree and the trial court's decree are upheld.
What the court decided
(1 of 4)
[CSA-237/2017]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 237/2017
Prakash Bhati S/o Shri Ramchandra Bhati, R/o Ramprakash Kutiya Opposite Krishi Mandi, Sojat City, District Pali.
----Appellant
- Versus
- Rajasthan State Industrial Development And Investment Corporation Ltd. Through Its Regional Manager, Industrial Area, Pali.
- Rajasthan State Industrial Development And Investment Corporation Ltd. Through Its Chief Manager, Udhyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rakesh Arora. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjeet Purohit.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI J U D G M E N T
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the first appellate court was justified in dismissing the suit when the trial court had only partly decreed it without cross-objections from the defendant?
Whether Order XLI Rule 33 CPC empowers the first appellate court to reverse the trial court's decree in the absence of an appeal or cross-objections?
Whether the observations in the first appellate judgment dismissing the suit can be sustained where no cross-objections were filed by the defendant?
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Prakash Bhati
- respondent
Rajasthan State Industrial Development And Investment Corporation Ltd.
Coram
Arun Bhansali
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Rajasthan HC
- Decided on
- · February
- Registered
- Case no.
- CSA/237/2017
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court