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

2013 Supreme(All) 1259

SUDHIR AGARWAL
MITHAIYA – Appellant
Versus
RAMJIT – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.C. Singh for the Appellant; H.S.N. Tripathi and P.S. Tripathi for the Respondents

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Heard Sri R.C. Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri H.S.N. Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for respondents.

2. The plaintiff’s Original Suit No. 2078 of 1996 proceeded ex parte and decreed by Trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 27.5.2000, whereagainst the defendants-respondents instituted Civil Appeal No. 15 of 2000 which has been allowed by Lower Appellate Court observing that Trial Court did not discuss the matter on merits. The Lower Appellate Court while allowing appeal not only has set aside Trial Court’s judgment but the suit has also been dismissed. Neither it has gone into the merits of the case nor has remanded the same to Trial Court permitting it to look into merits and, therefore, virtually the impugned appellate judgment has resulted in dismissal of suit without there being any decision on merits of the case.

3. It is no doubt true that even if no written statement is filed and the defendants have not contested the matter yet the plaintiff is not entitled for decree of suit inasmuch as he is under an obligation to prove his case and only then he can be granted relief and not otherwise.

4. Under Order VIII Rule 1










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