SWAMI RAM NIVAS RAM SANEHI Vs. SWAMI RAM VINOD
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND (AT: NAINITAL)
Swami Ram Nivas Ram Sanehi
Swami Ram Vinod
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) Mr. B.C. Pandey, learned Senior Advocate for the appellant, while arguing the appeal submitted that the findings on issued no.1 by the 1 st Appellate Court are perverse in law as well as in fact and the 1 st Appellate Court has failed to decide the issue no.1 in totality in terms of Order XLI Rule 31 of C.P.C. He prayed for framing of additional substantial question of law. Learned Senior Advocate for the appellant further submitted that there is sufficient pleadings in this regard in the memo of appeal as also in the substantial questions framed in the memo of appeal. He submitted that the question, which he is proposing to be framed as additional substantial question of law is essential for just and proper decision of appeal and goes to the root of the matter. Learned Senior Advocate for the appellant placed reliance on the judgments of Hon'ble the Apex Court, Manicka Poosali (dead) by Lrs. And ors. vs. Anjalai Ammal and anr., 2005 10 SCC 38, K.G. Shivalingappa (dead) by Lrs. And ors. vs. G.S. Eswarippa and ors., 2004 12 SCC 189 and P. Chandrasekharan and ors. vs. S. Kanakrajan and ors, 2007 5 SCC 669.
(3.) Mr. B.C. Pandey, Senior Advocate submitted that normally the substantial question of law are framed by the High Court at the time of admission of appeal and High court is required to hear the appeal on the Substantial question of law so farmed. But High Court can frame any additional substantial question of law not earlier formulated by it, if the Court is satisfied that the case involves such question.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.