Allowed

Anand Singh Bisht and Others v. Nusrat Ullah Khan and Another

Uttarakhand HC12 Mar 2014SA/24/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this second appeal, the single judge dismissed the appellants' challenge to the lower appellate court's discretion to finally determine the suit under Order 41 Rule 24 CPC despite the trial court deciding on different grounds, rejecting the submission that new issues must be referred back under Order 41 Rule 25 CPC.

What did the court decide?

Second appeal dismissed in limine for lack of substantial question of law.

Anand Singh Bisht and Others Vs Nusrat… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Uttarakhand HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶2

Second Appeal No. 24 of 2014

¶3

Anand Singh Bisht & others ......Appellants/Defendants Versus Sri Nusrat Ullah Khan & another ………Respondents/Plaintiffs

¶4

Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.(Oral)

¶5

Mr. Sarvesh Agarwal, Advocate, present for the appellants/defendants.

¶6

Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and perused the record.

¶7

This is defendants’ second appeal. A suit for permanent injunction was filed before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nainital which was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs. Appeal filed against the said order, was also dismissed. In sum and substance, the only substantial question of law which the counsel for the appellants has raised before this Court, is that under Order 41 Rule 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, if the first appellate court had framed new issues, he was liable to send the matter back to the trial court to give finding on such issues. Order 41 Rule 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure reads as under:-

¶8

“ 25.Where Appellate Court may frame issues and refer them for trial to Court whose decree appealed from.- Where the Court from whose decree the appeal is preferred has omitted to frame or try any issue, or to determine any question of fact, which appears to the Appellate Court essential to the right decision of the suit upon the merits, the Appellate Court may, if

¶9

¶10

necessary, frame issues, and refer the same for trial to the Court from whose decree the appeal is preferred, and in such case shall direct such Court to take the additional evidence required;

¶11

and such Court shall proceed to try such issues, and shall return the evidence to the Appellate Court together with its findings thereon and the reasons therefor within such time as may be fixed by the Appellate Court or extend by it from time to time.”

¶12

This submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is totally wrong as under Order 41 Rule 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the first appellate court has got full power to finally determine the suit. Order 41 Rule 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure reads as under:-

¶13

“24. Where evidence on record sufficient, Appellate Court may determine case finally .- Where the evidence upon the record is sufficient to enable the Appellate Court to pronounce judgment, the Appellate Court may, after resettling the issues, if necessary, finally determine the suit, notwithstanding that the judgment of the Court from whose decree the appeal is preferred has proceeded wholly upon some ground other than that on which the Appellate Court proceeds.”

¶14

Under the aforesaid provision if the evidence on the record is sufficient which can enable the Appellate Court to pronounce judgment, the Appellate Court may, even after resettling the issues, if necessary, finally decide the case, notwithstanding that the trial court (from whose decree the appeal is preferred), has proceeded wholly upon some other ground than on which the Appellate Court proceeds.

¶15

¶16

No other question of law, much any substantial question of law, is made out. The second appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limine.

¶17

(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 12.03.2014

¶18

Anand Singh Bisht and Others v. Nusrat Ullah Khan and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Singh Bisht and Others v. Nusrat Ullah Khan and Another

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

Mahesh Chandra Singh Bisht and Others Vs State Of Uttarakhand and Others

Mohd Aadil and Others Vs State of Uttarakhand and Others

Geeta Vs State of Uttarakhand and Others

Jiya Lal Vs State Of Uttarakhand and Others

Athlesh Kumar Agari Vs State Of Uttarakhand and Others

Dhanveer Singh Negi Vs Chief General Manager U.K.Jal Sansthan and Others