B. R GAVAI, SANJAY KAROL
Suresh Lataruji Ramteke – Appellant
Versus
Sau. Sumanbai Pandurang Petkar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KAROL J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The following questions arise for consideration of this Court:
2.1 Whether in the absence of affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the parties on addressing the framed substantial questions of law, the High Court could have proceeded to decide the same in an appeal preferred under section 100 Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter “CPC”), particularly, when the findings of fact rendered by two Courts, were sought to be reversed?
2.2 Whether in the absence of any trial record or without summoning and perusing the trial record, findings of fact on the issue of plaintiff’s readiness and willingness to execute the sale deed, could have been reversed by the High Court in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction under section 100 CPC?
3. Though, initially in the defendants’ appeal, which was listed firstly on 26th April 2022, the High Court fixed the matter for preliminary hearing on 29th September 2022, but adjourned it for the next day, i.e., 30th September, 2022 when, after framing the substantial questions of law, proceeded to hear the
B.C. Shivashankara v. B.R. Nagaraj
Sukhbir Singh v. Brij Pal Singh
Panchugopal Barua v. Umesh Chandra Goswami and Ors. (1997) 4 SCC 713 Two Judge Bench – Relied.
Randhir Kaur v. Prithvi Pal Singh & Ors.
Santosh Hazari v. Purushottam Tiwari
Shiv Cotex v. Tirgun Auto Plast Pvt Ltd. & Ors.
Gajaraba Bhikhubha Vadher v. Sumara Umar Amad
Kichha Sugar Co. Ltd. v. Roofrite (P) Ltd.
U.R. Virupakshappa v. Sarvamangala
Mehboob-Ur-Rehman v. Ahsanul Ghani
Govindbhai Chhotabhai Patel v. Patel Ramanbhai Mathurbhai.
Kondiba Dagadu Kadam v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.