SUDESH BANSAL
Roopsingh – Appellant
Versus
Raghunath – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. The appellant-plaintiffs (hereafter referred to "Plaintiffs") have preferred this second appeal under Section 100 of CPC assailing the judgment and decree dated 11.12.2017 passed in civil first appeal No.143/2006 by the Court of Additional District Judge No.1, Alwar, affirming the judgment and decree dated 13.10.2006 passed in civil suit No.19/04 by the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Division) and Judicial Magistrate No.4, Alwar whereby and whereunder the appellant-plaintiffs' suit for specific performance has been dismissed on merits.
2. Heard learned counsel for appellants and perused the impugned judgments and record.
3. Learned counsel for appellants has raised arguments that before the first appellate court an application under order 41 Rule 27 CPC was filed by appellants on 30.04.2015, but the first appellate court has neither considered nor decided the said application while dismissing the first appeal vide impugned judgment dated 11.12.2017. Counsel has argued that it was the duty of the first appellate court to consider and decide the application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC filed by appellants before or at the time of deciding the first appeal finally.
Rajasthan High Court Kishanlal & Ors. vs. Ramchandra & Ors. AIR 2020 Raj 145
C.Doddanarayana Reddy vs. C.Jayarama Reddy (2020) 4 SCC 659)
Hakam Singh vs. State of Haryana & Ors. AIR 2008 SC 2990
Jitender Singh and Anr minor through Mother vs. Mehar Singh & Ors. (AIR 2009 SC 354)
Rajeshwar Vishwanath Mamidwar & Ors. vs. Dashrath Narayan Chilwelkar & Ors.
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.