TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 1734X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the question about the defensibility of the ultimate direction by the trial Court and thereafter proceeded to quote paragraphs from the trial Court judgment. Posing a question which is relevant for adjudication of the appeal is not enough. There has to have been proper analysis of the same. That apart, there are other issues they deserved to be dealt with. Therefore, the obvious conclusion is that the judgment passed by the High Court is not a reasoned one. It is well settled in law that the reason is the life of law. It is that filament that injects soul to the judgment. Absence of analysis not only evinces non-application of mind but mummifies the core spirit of the judgment. A Judge has to constantly remind himself that absence of reason in the process of adjudication makes the ultimate decision pregnable. In Girijanandini Devi [ 1966 (8) TMI 65 - SUPREME COURT] , the Court ruled that while agreeing with the view of the trial court on the evidence, it is not necessary to restate the effect of the evidence or reiterate the reasons given by the trial court. Expression of general agreement with reasons given in the trial court judgment which is under appeal should ordinarily suffi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sted a joint family which possessed sufficient nucleus to purchase the schedule property. A ground was taken that the partition deed had not seen the light of the day for more than 22 years and when its genuineness was questioned on the basis of materials brought on record, the said issue had not been appositely addressed. 3. The High Court, as the impugned judgment reveals, noted some of the contentions and posed the question whether the trial Court was justified in directing the defendants to execute a rectification deed to correct the error in stating the site number in the partition deed dated 01.04.1981 marked in evidence as Ex.P-1. It took note of the fact that in the said partition deed site No. 25, which was allotted to the plaintiff, was erroneously described as site No. 35 and hence, relief of the rectification of the error in the deed had been granted by the trial Court. Thereafter the learned single Judge, as is vivid, copiously quoted from the judgment of the trial Court and held that he did not find any infirmities in the findings recorded by the trial Court and certain documents brought on record showed that the plaintiff was in possession of the site No. 25. On the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the life of law. It is that filament that injects soul to the judgment. Absence of analysis not only evinces non-application of mind but mummifies the core spirit of the judgment. A Judge has to constantly remind himself that absence of reason in the process of adjudication makes the ultimate decision pregnable. While dealing with the first appeal preferred under Section 96 CPC, the Court in State of Rajasthan v. Harphool Singh (dead) through his LRs (2000) 5 SCC 652 took note of the exception to the judgment passed by the first appellate court by observing that there was no due or proper application of mind or any critical analysis or objective consideration of the matter, despite the same being the first appellate court. 8. A three-Judge Bench in Santosh Hazari v. Purushottam Tiwari (deceased) by LRs (2001) 3 SCC 179 , while discussing about power of the first appellate court, has opined that it is the final court of facts and, therefore, pure findings of fact remain immune from challenge before the High Court in second appeal. It is necessary to note that the Court had also held thus: The appellate court has jurisdiction to reverse or affirm the findings of the trial court. Firs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the Code. The purpose of referring to the said decision is to highlight the responsibility cast on the first appellate court or a court hearing the first appeal. 9. In Madhukar and others v. Sangram and others (2001) 4 SCC 756 , the Court noticed that the High Court has framed two questions and thereafter had set aside the judgment and decree of the trial court and allowed the first appeal. Discussing about the duty of the first appellate court, the Court had referred to the decision in Santosh Hazari (supra) and reiterated the principles stated therein. 10. In H.K.N. Swami v. Irshad Basith (dead) by LRs (2005) 10 SCC 243 , the two-Judge Bench ruled: The first appeal has to be decided on facts as well as on law. In the first appeal parties have the right to be heard both on questions of law as also on facts and the first appellate court is required to address itself to all issues and decide the case by giving reasons. Unfortunately, the High Court, in the present case has not recorded any finding either on facts or on law. Sitting as the first appellate court it was the duty of the High Court to deal with all the issues and the evidence led by the parties before recording the fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to differ with the trial Court judgment. That is not the statement of law expressed by the Court. The statement of law made in Santosh Hazari (supra) has to be borne in mind. 13. In this regard, a three-Judge Bench decision in Asha Devi v. Dukhi Sao and another AIR 1974 SC 2048 is worthy of noticing, although the context was different. In the said case, the question arose with regard to power of the Division Bench hearing a Letters Patent appeal from the judgment of the single Judge in a first appeal. The Court held that the Letters Patent appeal lies both on questions of fact and law. The purpose of referring to the said decision is only to show that when the Letters Patent appeal did lie, it was not restricted to the questions of law. The appellant could raise issues pertaining to facts and appreciation of evidence. This is indicative of the fact that the first appellate court has a defined role and its judgment should show application of mind and reflect the reasons on the basis of which it agrees with the trial Court. There has to be an expression of opinion in the proper sense of the said phrase. It cannot be said that mere concurrence meets the requirement of law. Needless t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|