Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. ABDUL NAZEER, SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.
MALLURU MALLAPPA(D) THR. LRS. – APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
KURUVATHAPPA & ORS. – RESPONDENTS
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1485 OF 2020 [Arising out of SLP(C) No.18092 of 2014]
Decided on : 12-02-2020
(a) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 96 and 100 - A first appeal u/s 96 is entirely different from a second appeal u/s 100 - Second appeal is expressly barred unless a question of law is involved and that too, substantial in nature. (Para 15)
(b) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order XLI Rule 31- Guidelines for appellate court - Appellate court required to examine all issues and record its reasons for agreeing or disagreeing with views of trial court - Instantly High Court dismissing appeal by a cryptic order neither re-appreciating the evidence of the parties, nor passing a reasoned order - Failure to follow provisions of Order XLI Rule 31 - Not sustainable. (Para 20)
Facts of the case:
Appellant files a suit for specific performance. Trial court dismissed the suit without examining readiness and willingness of the prospective purchaser.
High Court dismissed the first appeal by a cryptic order.
Result: Appeal allowed.
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, the key points are as follows:
An appeal from a decree passed by a court exercising original jurisdiction is governed by the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, specifically Sections 96 and 100, which distinguish between first and second appeals. A first appeal under Section 96 involves a comprehensive re-examination of all issues, including factual matters, and requires the appellate court to record reasons for its decision (!) (!) .
The appellate court is mandated to follow specific guidelines when deciding an appeal, including clearly stating the points for determination, the decision on each point, and the reasons for such decisions. This is essential for ensuring transparency and proper adjudication (!) (!) .
The judgment of the appellate court must be in writing, signed, and must explicitly state the points for determination, the decision, and the reasons supporting it. This requirement ensures that the appellate process is thorough and just (!) (!) .
An appeal is a continuation of the original proceedings and involves a re-hearing on questions of law and fact. The appellate court's role is to rectify possible errors and not to create new causes of action (!) (!) .
The scope of a first appeal is broad, allowing for a review of all issues, whereas a second appeal under Section 100 is limited to questions of law that are substantial in nature (!) .
When an appellate court affirms a trial court's findings, it is sufficient for it to express its agreement with the reasons given by the trial court, provided it does so explicitly. However, if it reverses or varies the decree, it must clearly specify the relief to which the appellant is entitled (!) .
The failure of an appellate court to follow procedural requirements, such as those outlined in Order XLI Rule 31 of the CPC, undermines the validity of its judgment. It is necessary for the appellate court to pass a reasoned order that addresses all issues and evidence (!) .
In the case discussed, the High Court dismissed the appeal in a cryptic manner without reappreciating the evidence or passing a reasoned order, which was contrary to the procedural mandates. As a result, the appellate decision was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh disposal in accordance with law (!) (!) .
The case also involved issues related to the limitation period for filing the suit, which was argued to be within the prescribed time frame under relevant legal provisions, but this aspect was not properly examined by the appellate court (!) (!) .
Overall, the judgment emphasizes the importance of procedural compliance, detailed reasoning, and comprehensive examination of all issues by appellate courts to ensure justice and uphold legal standards (!) (!) (!) .
Please let me know if you need further analysis or assistance.
JUDGMENT
S. Abdul Nazeer, J.
Delay condoned. Leave granted.
2. This is the plaintiff's appeal challenging the judgment and decree in RFA No. 1731 of 2006 dated 09.02.2012 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore, whereby the High Court has confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the trial court in O.S. No. 32 of 2005 dated 09.06.2006.
3. The plaintiff filed the above suit against the respondents/defendants for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 30.3.2000. The agreement provided that the sale was to be executed within three years from the date of the agreement, subject to the defendants fulfilling certain obligations.
4. Defendant No.1 filed the written statement and the other defendants filed a memo adopting the same as their written statement. Defendant No.1 admitted the execution of the agreement to sell in favour of the plaintiff. However, the defendant pleaded that the suit was barred by limitation. It was further contended that plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform his part of the contract.
5. Based upon the rival pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed the following issues: -
"1. Whether the plaintiff proves that, the defendants 1 and 2 their father have executed an agreement to sell on 30.3.2000 for Rs. 2,00,000/- in favour of the plaintiff after receiving Rs. 1,50,000/- as earnest money?
2. Whether the plaintiff proves that, he is always ready and willing to perform his part of contract?
3. Whether the suit of the plaintiff is barred by limitation?
4. What order or decree?"
6. The plaintiff got himself examined as PW-1 and Ex. P-1, P1(a) to (c) were marked in his evidence. The defendant No.1 was examined as DW1 and three other witnesses were examined as DW-2 to 4. On appreciation of the evidence on record, the trial court held that the suit was barred by time. It was also held that the plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. The suit was accordingly dismissed.
7. As noticed above, the High Court has confirmed the said decree of the trial court.
8. We have heard Shri S.N. Bhat, learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff. Though notice was served on the respondents, no one has entered appearance on their behalf.
9. Shri Bhat, learned counsel, has made two-fold submissions. Firstly, he submits that the High Court has passed a cryptic judgment without reappreciating the evidence on record. It was argued that the first appeal filed by the plaintiff under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the CPC) was a continuation of the suit and it was incumbent upon the High Court to reassess the entire evidence on record. It was argued that the High Court as an appellate court has failed to follow the guidelines provided under Order XLI Rule 31 of the CPC while deciding the appeal. Secondly, it was argued that the agreement to sell was dated 30.03.2000, providing for three years' time from the date of the agreement to complete the execution of the sale deed. The suit was filed on 28.01.2005 which was well within time. Referring to Article 54 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963, (for short 'the Limitation Act') it was submitted that when a date is fixed for performance of the contract, the period of limitation for filing the suit is three years from the date fixed for the performance. It was further argued that there is no finding by the High Court as to the readiness and willingness of the plaintiff to perform his part of the contract.
10. We have carefully considered the submission of the learned counsel made at the Bar and perused the materials placed on record.
11. Section 96 of the CPC provides for filing of an appeal from the decree passed by any court exercising original jurisdiction to the court authorized to hear the appeals from the decisions of such courts. In the instant case, the appeal from the decree passed by the trial court lies to the High Court. The expression 'appeal' has not been defined in the CPC. Black's Law Dic
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
