1. Civil suit for specific performance of an agreement. (Para 5 )
Back
Next 
2018 Supreme(SC) 136
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.K. AGRAWAL, ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, JJ.
G. Saraswathi & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
Rathinammal & Ors. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2112 OF 2018 [Arising out of SLP (C) No.25814 of 2004]
Decided On : 15-02-2018
Important Points
IMPORTANT POINT
Order showing non application of mind and without any reason cannot be sustained.
Order showing non application of mind and without any reason cannot be sustained.
Subject
Appeal - LETTERS PATENT APPEAL
Act Referred
Headnote
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Order LXI Rule 31 – Division Bench dismissing LPA cursorily without dealing with any issue arising in the case as also the arguments urged by the parties in support of their case – Not in conformity with Order LXI Rule 31 – Reasoned order – Matter remanded. (Para 12, 13, 14)
Facts of the case:
The appellants filed a civil suit against the respondents for specific performance of the agreement.
The Trial Court decreed the appellants’ suit.
The Single Judge of the High Court allowed the respondents’ appeal and while setting aside of the judgment/decree of the Trial Court dismissed the appellants’ suit.
The Division Bench dismissed the appeal.
Finding of the Court:
Impugned order is not sustainable.
Result: Appeal allowed. Matter remanded.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether the Division Bench of the High Court was justified in dismissing the Letters Patent Appeal. (Para 8 )
3. The Division Bench dismissed the appeal cursorily without analyzing issues or arguments, failing to apply judicial mind or provide reasoning. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 )
4. Appellate orders must be reasoned and contain facts, issues, submissions, and legal principles, conforming to Order 41 Rule 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. (Para 13 , 14 )
5. Appeal allowed and impugned order set aside; matter remanded to the Division Bench of the High Court for fresh decision on merits. (Para 10 , 15 , 17 )
6. What are the essential components of a reasoned judicial order in an appeal?
A reasoned order must include a narration of the bare facts of the case, the issues arising, the submissions urged by the parties, the applicable legal principles, and the reasons supporting the findings on all issues. (Para 14 )
7. Does a cryptic and unreasoned order comply with the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908?
No, an order that fails to discuss the factual and legal controversy, provide categorical findings on issues, or appreciate the arguments of the parties is not in conformity with Order 41 Rule 31 of the Code. (Para 13 , 14 )
8. What is the legal impact of a court passing an unreasoned order in an appellate proceeding?
Such orders are unsustainable as they cause prejudice to the parties by depriving them of the knowledge of why a party won or lost, indicating a failure to apply judicial mind. (Para 13 , 14 )
JUDGMENT
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal arises from the final judgment and order dated 21.04.2004 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in L.P.A. No.32 of 2000 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment and decree dated 30.10.1998 passed by the Single Judge of the High Court in A.S. No.630 of 1984.
3. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass and it would be clear from the facts stated hereinbelow.
4. The appellants are the plaintiffs whereas the respondents are the defendants in the civil suit out of which this appeal arises.
5. The appellants filed a civil suit against the respondents for specific performance of the agreement. The respondents filed their written statement and denied the material averments of the appellants’ claim set up in the plaint. The Trial Court on the basis of pleadings framed the issues. Parties adduced their evidence. By Judgment/decree dated 03.07.1984, the Trial Court decreed the appellants’ suit.
6. The respondents felt aggrieved and filed appeal before the Single Bench of the High Court. By judgment/decree dated 30.10.1998, the Single Judge allowed the respondents’ appeal and while setting aside of the judgment/decree of the Trial Court dismissed the appellants’ suit.
7. The appellant felt aggrieved and filed Letters Patent Appeal before the Division Bench. By impugned order, the Division Bench dismissed the appeal giving rise to filing of this appeal before this Court by way of special leave.
8. The short question, which arises for consideration in this appeal, is whether the Division Bench of the High Court was justified in dismissing the appellants’ Letters Patent Appeal.
9. Heard Mr. P.V. Yogeswaran, learned counsel for the appellants and Ms. Jyoti Parasher, learned counsel for the respondents.
10. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we are constrained to allow the appeal, set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the Division Bench of the High Court for deciding the LPA afresh on merits in accordance with law.
11. The impugned order reads as under:
“This L.P.A. coming on for hearing on Thursday the fifteen day April, 2004 upon perusing the grounds of Appeal, the order of the Honourable Mr. Justice P. Thangavel dated 30.10.98 and made in the exercise of the Special Appellate Jurisdiction of the High Court in A.S. No. 630 of 1984 and all other papers material to this case, and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. T.M. Hariharan, Advocate for the Appellants and Mr. K. Rakhunathan, Advocate for Ist respondent and steps not having been taken up to serve the notice to the Respondents 3 to 5 and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court doth order and decree as follows:
(i) That the judgment and Decree dated 30.10.98 and made in the exercise of the Appellate Jurisdiction of the Hon’ble High Court in A.S. No.630/1984 be and hereby are confirmed; and the letters patent appeal is dismissed; and
(ii) That there be no costs in this L.P.A.”
12. The need to remand the case to the High Court has occasioned for the reason that the Division Bench dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants (plaintiffs) cursorily without dealing with any of the issues arising in the case as also the arguments urged by the parties in support of their case.
13. Indeed, in the absence of any application of judicial mind to the factual and legal controversy involved in the appeal and further without even mentioning the factual narration of the case set up by the parties, the findings of the two Courts as to how they dealt with the issues arising in the case in their respective jurisdiction and without there being any discussion, appreciation, reasoning and categorical findings on the issues and why the findings of two Courts below deserve to be upheld or reversed, while dealing with the arguments of the parties in the light of legal principles applicable to the case, it is
