Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Smt. Asmathunnisa & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No.2610 of 2000
(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.3145 of 1997)
Petitioner: Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation
Respondent: Smt. Asmathunnisa & Ors.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No.2610 of 2000
(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.3145 of 1997)
Judges: S.B. MAJMUDAR & Y.K. SABHARWAL, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Apr 13, 2000
Head Note:
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Section 96 – First appeal – Method of disposal – First appeal dismissed summarily – No reasons given to agree with trial court. Held that orders set aside and matter remanded back for deciding on merits.(Para 5)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. A limited notice was issued on 3.2.1997 to the Respondents as under:
“Issue notice for final disposal on the application for condona-tion of delay and on Special Leave Petition to show cause why the matter be not remanded to the High Court for a fresh decision of the appeal on merits.”
3. Though the Respondents are served yet no one has appeared to contest the proceedings. The appeal is therefore, being finally disposed of.
4. Learned Counsel for the Appellant vehemently contended that he had many arguable points to be urged in the First Appeal before the High Court which has dismissed the same without giving any reason and without considering all the points in the appeal. The impugned order of the High Court reads as under:
“Heard. No grounds. Rejected.”
5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant is right when he contends that the High Court in First Appeal has not considered all the relevant points and has not come to a reasoned conclusion for agreeing with the trial court. We find that the appeal was not disposed of in accordance with law. Only on this short ground, without expressing any opinion on the merits of controversy between the parties, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. First Appeal No.813 of 1995 is restored to the file of the High Court with a request to redecide the same on merits after hearing the parties and by writing a reasoned order.
1. Leave granted.
2. A limited notice was issued on 3.2.1997 to the Respondents as under:
“Issue notice for final disposal on the application for condona-tion of delay and on Special Leave Petition to show cause why the matter be not remanded to the High Court for a fresh decision of the appeal on merits.”
3. Though the Respondents are served yet no one has appeared to contest the proceedings. The appeal is therefore, being finally disposed of.
4. Learned Counsel for the Appellant vehemently contended that he had many arguable points to be urged in the First Appeal before the High Court which has dismissed the same without giving any reason and without considering all the points in the appeal. The impugned order of the High Court reads as under:
“Heard. No grounds. Rejected.”
5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant is right when he contends that the High Court in First Appeal has not considered all the relevant points and has not come to a reasoned conclusion for agreeing with the trial court. We find that the appeal was not disposed of in accordance with law. Only on this short ground, without expressing any opinion on the merits of controversy between the parties, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. First Appeal No.813 of 1995 is restored to the file of the High Court with a request to redecide the same on merits after hearing the parties and by writing a reasoned order.
