Important pointWhere appellate Court has considered entire evidence and discussed same in detail, come to any conclusion and its findings are supported by reasons even though point has not been framed there is substantial compliance with provisions of Order 41 Rule 31 CPC.

Headnote:Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order 41 Rule 31—Points for determination to be formulated by appellate Court while deciding appeal—Non-compliance may not vitiate the judgment and make it wholly void and may be ignored if there was substantial compliance with it and second Appellate Court is in a position to ascertain findings of lower appellate Court—Suit for possession and recovery of arrears of rent and damages decreed by trial Court—Lower appellate Court upheld decree—High Court dismissed second appeal—Appeal—High Court categorically recorded that 1st appellate Court had considered evidence and had given finding to come to conclusions arrived at—No interference was warranted.
Held : The question whether in a particular case there has been a substantial compliance with the provisions of Order 41 Rule 31 ref=act:10444>CPC has to be determined on the nature of the judgment delivered in each case. Non-compliance with the provisions may not vitiate the judgment and make it wholly void, and may be ignored if there has been substantial compliance with it and the second appellate Court is in a position to ascertain the findings of the lower appellate Court. It is no doubt desirable that the appellate court should comply with all the requirements of Order 41 Rule 31 CPC. But if it is possible to make out from the judgment that there is substantial compliance with the said requirements and that justice has not thereby suffered, that would be sufficient. Where the appellate court has considered the entire evidence on record and discussed the same in detail, come to any conclusion and its findings are supported by reasons even though the point has not been framed by the appellate Court there is substantial compliance with the provisions of Order 41 Rule 31 CPC and the judgment is not in any manner vitiated by the absence of a point of determination. Where there is an honest endeavour on the part of the lower appellate court to consider the controversy between the parties and there is proper appraisement of the respective cases and weighing and balancing of the evidence, facts and the other considerations appearing on both sides is clearly manifest by the perusal of the judgment of the lower appellate court, it would be a valid judgment even though it does not contain the points for determination. The object of the Rule in making it incumbent upon the appellate court to frame points for determination and to cite reasons for the decision is to focus attention of the Court on the rival contentions which arise for determination and also to provide litigant parties opportunity is understanding the ground upon which the decision is founded with a view to enable them to know the basis of the decision and if so considered appropriate and so advised to avail the remedy of Second Appeal conferred by Section 100 CPC. (Para 9)
It has been categorically recorded by the High Court that the First appellate Court had considered the evidence led on behalf of the parties and has given finding to come to the conclusion arrived at. It noted that the lower appellate Court had independently considered the evidence and had given different findings on the issues framed by the trial Court and on the basis of the arguments which were advanced before it. It was further noted that there was detailed discussion giving reasons for affirming the order of the trial Court. Learned counsel for the appellants had urged that the suit filed by the plaintiff was not maintainable as the plaintiff was the diocese represented by its procurator. It was submitted that the plaintiff is not entitled to any relief as was prayed for in the suit. This point was not urged before the High Court and, therefore, it would not consider necessary to go into that aspect. Judged in the background of legal principles set out above the judgment of the High Court does not suffer from any infirmity. (Para 12)

Judgment

Arijit Pasayat, J.—These two appeals are directed against the orders of a learned Single Judge of the Madras High Court. A Second Appeal was dismissed and the review petition filed was also dismissed.

2. Learned Single Judge of the Madras High Court dismissed the Second Appeal filed by the appellants under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short the ‘CPC’). The Second Appeal was filed by the defendants 1 to 3 i.e. the present appellants against the judgment and decree made in A.S.No. 2 of 1993 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Periakulam confirming the judgment and decree dated 18.3.1992 made in O.S.No. 597 of 1982 on the file of District Munsif Court, Periakulam. The respondent in the Second Appeal filed the suit for possession of the suit property as well as the recovery of arrears of rent and damages. The learned District Munsif, Periakulam, on consideration of the facts decreed the suit. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the appellants herein preferred an appeal before the Sub Court, Periakulam. The learned Sub Judge also confirmed the findings of the learned District Munsif and dismissed the appeal. A Second Appeal was filed before the High Court.

3. At the time of admission of the Second Appeal the following question was framed for determination.

"Whether the lower appellate court is correct in deciding the appeal without any points for determination as contemplated under Order 41 Rule 31 of CPC?"

4. It was contended before the High Court that Order 41 Rule 31, C.P.C. is mandatory and compliance is necessary. When the points of determination have not been specifically indicated the appellate judgment becomes vulnerable. Stand of the respondent before the High Court was that there has been a substantial compliance with the provisions of Order 41 Rule 31, CPC and, therefore, the appeal was without any merit.

5. The High Court accepted the stand of the respondent. Though some questions framed related to merits, as noted the dispute was restricted to the alleged non-compliance of Order 41 Rule 31 CPC. Accordingly, the Second Appeal was dismissed. Review Petition was also dismissed.

6. In support of the appeals, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the High Court did not keep in view the true scope and ambit of Order 41 Rule 31 CPC. Points for determination were not specifically indicated by the First appellate Court and, therefore, the judgment was non-est.

7. Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand supported the impugned judgment.

8. Order 41 Rule 31 CPC reads as follows:

"Contents, date and signature of judgment—The judgment of the Appellate court shall be in writing and shall state-

(a) the points for determination;

(b) the decision thereon;

(d) where the decree appealed from is reversed or varied, the relief to which the appellant is entitled,

and shall at the time that it is pronounced be signed and dated by the Judge or by the Judges concurring therein."

9. The question whether in a particular case there has been a substantial compliance with the provisions of Order 41 Rule 31 CPC has to be determined on the nature of the judgment delivered in each case. Non-compliance with the provisions may not vitiate the judgment and make it wholly void, and may be ignored if there has been substantial compliance with it and the second appellate Court is in a position to ascertain the findings of the lower appellate Court. It is no doubt desirable that the appellate court should comply with all the requirements of Order 41 Rule 31 CPC. But if it is possible to make out from the judgment that there is substantial compliance with the said requirements and that justice has not thereby suffered, that would be sufficient. Where the appellate court has considered the entire evidence on record and discussed the same in detail, come to any conclusion and its findings are supported by reasons even though the point has not been framed by the appellate Cou

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2006 Supreme(SC) 205

Important pointWhere appellate Court has considered entire evidence and discussed same in detail, come to any conclusion and its findings are supported by reasons even though point has not been framed there is substantial compliance with provisions of Order 41 Rule 31 CPC.

Cases Referred (2)