2023 (9) TMI 1475 - SC - Indian Laws

Violation of principles of natural justice - absence of affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the parties on addressing the framed substantial questions of law u/s section 100 Code of Civil Procedure - absence of any trial record or without summoning and perusing the trial record. Adequate Opportunity of Hearing in Appellate Jurisdiction u/s 100 CPC - HELD THAT - The jurisprudence on Section 100, CPC is rich and varied. Time and again this Court in numerous judgments has laid down, distilled and further clarified the requirements that must necessarily be met in order for a Second Appeal as laid down therein, to be maintainable, and thereafter be adjudicated upon. In the present case, the parties were not given the requisite time to meet the questions framed by the Court. Section 100(5) CPC suggests that there is a gap between framing of the questions at admission and hearing, as the proviso thereto gives an opportunity to the Court to frame additional questions at the time of hearing, on which the parties would have to be heard as well. Meaning thereby, that the questions framed at the time of admission, at such point of subsequent framing of questions are already known to the parties and they have had time to prepare to address arguments on the same. The High Court's failure to provide such an opportunity and its haste in disposing of the appeal was found to be contrary to the procedural requirements and principles. Reversal of Findings of Fact Without Trial Record in Appellate Jurisdiction u/s 100 CPC - HELD THAT - The High Court, while exercising its jurisdiction u/s 100 CPC, should not interfere with findings of fact unless there is perversity or a complete misapplication of law. The Court emphasized that for reappreciation of evidence to be justified, the actual evidence before the lower courts must be called for and perused. The High Court's decision to overturn the concurrent findings of fact without examining the trial record was deemed improper. It is deemed fit to remand the matter to the High Court for consideration afresh in accordance with law - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Adequate opportunity of hearing in appellate jurisdiction u/s 100 CPC.
2. Reversal of findings of fact without trial record in appellate jurisdiction u/s 100 CPC.

Summary:

Issue 1: Adequate Opportunity of Hearing in Appellate Jurisdiction u/s 100 CPC
The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court could decide an appeal u/s 100 CPC without affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the parties on the framed substantial questions of law. The Court emphasized that the presence and framing of a "substantial question of law" is a sine qua non for the exercise of jurisdiction u/s 100 CPC. The Court reiterated that substantial questions of law must be framed at the time of admission, and parties must be given adequate time to address these questions. The High Court's failure to provide such an opportunity and its haste in disposing of the appeal was found to be contrary to the procedural requirements and principles laid down by the Supreme Court in various judgments.

Issue 2: Reversal of Findings of Fact Without Trial Record in Appellate Jurisdiction u/s 100 CPC
The Supreme Court also considered whether the High Court could reverse findings of fact on the issue of the plaintiff's readiness and willingness to execute the sale deed without summoning and perusing the trial record. The Court held that the High Court, while exercising its jurisdiction u/s 100 CPC, should not interfere with findings of fact unless there is perversity or a complete misapplication of law. The Court emphasized that for reappreciation of evidence to be justified, the actual evidence before the lower courts must be called for and perused. The High Court's decision to overturn the concurrent findings of fact without examining the trial record was deemed improper.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court and remanded the matter for fresh consideration in accordance with the law. The Court highlighted the necessity of framing substantial questions of law at the time of admission and providing adequate opportunity for parties to address these questions. Additionally, the Court underscored the requirement for the High Court to peruse the trial record before overturning findings of fact. The appeal was accepted and allowed, with the case restored to the file of the High Court.