SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(Ori) 142

DALVEER BHANDARI, DEEPAK VERMA
B. M. Narayana Gowda – Appellant
Versus
Shanthamma – Respondent


ORDER

Leave granted.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

The High Court, in the instant appeal, while deciding the First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure has allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court without properly examining the facts and law.

This Court has observed in a number of cases that the first appeal is a valuable right of the appellant and therein all questions of fact and law decided by trial court are open for reconsideration. In a case where the High Court found the trial court judgment is unsatisfactory and wanted to set aside the judgment, the High Court ought to have carefully examined the facts and the law and given cogent reasons for setting aside the trial court judgment.

The legal position in law is no longer res integra. This Court had repeatedly said that in first appeal the High Court needs to decide questions of fact and law comprehensively by giving fulldressed hearing.

Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn our attention to a judgment of this Court in Sanjay Singh Rawat and Others Vs. National Small Industries Corpn. Ltd. and Others, (2005) 12 SCC p.146, the relevant portion of the judgme








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top