Request for interpration of attached order
JAIME
(Querist) 21 July 2018
This query is : Resolved
Heard learned Counsel appearing for the
petitioners.
2. The above petition challenges an order passed by the learned
Judge framing additional issues, based on an application filed by the
petitioners. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has pointed out
that the learned Judge has erroneously considered that the petitioners
are claiming ownership in respect of the property bearing Survey
No.47/20, as well as Survey No. 47/20-A of Assonora Village. The
learned Counsel also points out that though the issue of cause of
action has been framed, nevertheless, there is no specific issue
framed as to whether respondents prove that the petitioners had
knowledge of the deed of partition.
3. I have considered the submissions of the learned Counsel and
with his assistance, I have gone through the impugned order, as well
as the application filed by the petitioners for framing additional
issues and the issues which were already framed by the learned
Judge.
4. With regard to the first contention of the learned Counsel
appearing for the petitioners, on perusal of issue No.2, as framed by
the learned Judge, the fact that the original property is surveyed
under No.47/20, which was thereafter surveyed under No.47/20-A is
taken care of. In such circumstances, the contention of the learned
Counsel appearing for the petitioners that a specific issue has to be
framed in connection with the property surveyed under No.47/20-A,
would not survive.
5. With regard to the second contention of the learned Counsel
appearing for the petitioners, on perusal of the issues framed by the
learned Judge, I find that an issue of limitation has already been
framed. Consequently, the issue sought to be raised by the
petitioners would have to be established in the context of the findings
on such an issue.
6. In such circumstances, I find that there is no jurisdictional
error committed by the learned Judge which would call for
interference of this Court. The law provides that issues can be
framed and re-cast at any stage of the suit. As such, there is no
failure of justice to the petitioners in case this Court does not
interfere with the impugned order, at this stage.
7. Hence, the petition stands rejected.
The Plaintiffs filed Writ Petition against an impugned Order against the Trial Court for refusing to frame all issues, to frame proper issues and correct defective issues framed. The Petition was rejected by the High Court without properly examining the contents of the Writ Petition and by further stating that - The Law provides that Issues can be framed and recast at any stage of the suit and that the Court does not interfere with the impugned order at this stage. Does this mean that at the time of proving the issues framed by the court the Plaintiffs can raise objection against faulty issues and seek framing of all issues not framed? Or should the Plaintiffs move another application for framing of issues before the trial commences?
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 22 July 2018
Questions too long.
Guest
(Expert) 22 July 2018
Paras 6 & 7 are very clear. Instead of filing a writ petition against the impugned order of the lower court, you could have filed a writ by framing the issues on recast of the writ with the permission of the concerned court.
Guest
(Expert) 22 July 2018
Paras 6 & 7 are very clear. Instead of filing a writ petition against the impugned order of the lower court, you could have filed a writ by framing the issues on recast of the writ with the permission of the concerned court.
Guest
(Expert) 22 July 2018
Paras 6 & 7 are very clear. Instead of filing a writ petition against the impugned order of the lower court, you could have filed a writ by framing the issues on recast of the writ with the permission of the concerned court.
Guest
(Expert) 22 July 2018
Paras 6 & 7 are very clear. Instead of filing a writ petition against the impugned order of the lower court, you could have filed a writ by framing the issues on recast of the writ with the permission of the concerned court.
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 22 July 2018
You are a lawyer???
If you are unable to interpret simple order passed by the Court, seek guidance from some senior local lawyer.
Order is unambiguous and crystal clear.
