- (1.) Aggrieved of the order dated 11th of October, 2013 whereby the learned Trial Court declined the application dated 7th of September, 2013 under Order 14 Rule 5 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC', for short), the writ petitioner/plaintiff is before this Court by way of instant writ application under Article 227 of the Constitution.
(2.) Briefly, the essential material facts and particulars necessary for appreciation of the controversy are that the petitioner/plaintiff instituted a suit in the year 2003 for declaration, perpetual and mandatory injunction, pleading that the agricultural land bearing khasra number 462 in Village Daulatpura, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur, measuring 4.50 bigha, has been illegally sold to the respondent/ defendant number 1 (Rajmal Sharma), by Gram Panchayat, Nangal Siras in an auction. The learned Trial Court after having received the written statement from the respondents/defendants settled the issues on 12th of April, 2012. The petitioner/plaintiff as well as the respondents/defendants concluded their evidence and since 20th of March, 2013, the matter is pending for final arguments. The learned Trial Court on the application under Order 14 Rule 5 read with Section 151 CPC taking into consideration the reply submitted on behalf of the respondents/ defendants and after hearing the parties, dismissed the same vide impugned order dated 11th of October, 2013 observing that the controversy between the parties is with reference to sale deed dated 27th of January, 1998. While framing issue number 1 instead of date "27th of January, 1998", on account of typographical error "17th of January, 1998" has been mentioned. The Court below therefor, making necessary correction in the date as mentioned in issue number 1 i.e. the sale deed dated "27th of January, 1998", be read instead of "17th of January, 1998" and a correction to this effect was made in red ink.
(3.) The grievance of the petitioner/plaintiff is that the Trial Court has not framed the issues as per mandate of Order 14 Rule 5 CPC. The learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff in order to reinforce his submissions referring to the provisions of Order 14 Rule 5 CPC, placed reliance on the verdict delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Makhan Lal Bangal Versus Manas Bhunia & Ors, 2001 AIR(SC) 490wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held thus:- "An election petition is like a civil trial. The stage of framing the issues is an important one inasmuch as oh that day the scope of the trial is determined by laying the path on which the trial shall proceed excluding diversions and departures therefrom. The date fixed for settlement of issues is, therefore, a date fixed for hearing. The real dispute between the parties is determined, the area of conflict is narrowed and the concave mirror held by the court reflecting the pleadings of the parties pinpoints into issues the disputes on which the 'two sides differ. The correct decision of civil lis largely depends on correct framing of issues, correctly determining the real points in controversy which need to be decided. The scheme of order XIV of the Code of Civil Procedure dealing with settlement of issues shows that an issue arises when a material proposition of fact or law is affirmed by one party and denied by the other. Each material proposition affirmed by one party and denied by other should form the subject of distinct issue. An obligation is cast on the court to read the plaint/petition and the written statement/counter, if any, and then determine with the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties, the material propositions of fact or of law on which the parties are at variance. The issues shall be framed and recorded on which the decision of the case shall depend. The parties and their counsel are bound to assist the court in the process of framing of issues. Duty of the counsel does not belittle the primary obligation cast on the court. It is for the Presiding Judge to exert himself so as to frame sufficiently expressive issues. An omission to frame proper issues may be a ground for remanding the case for retrial subject to prejudice having been shown to have resulted by the omission. The petition may be disposed of at the first hearing if it appears that the parties are not at issue on any material question of law or of fact and the court may at once pronounce the judgment. If the parties are at issue on some questions of law or of fact, the suit or petition shall be fixed for trial calling upon the parties to adduce evidence on issues of fact. The evidence shall be confined to issues and the pleadings. No evidence on controversies not covered by issues and the pleadings, shall normally be admitted, for each party leads evidence in support of issues the burden of proving which lies on him. The object of an issue is to tie down the evidence and arguments and decision to a particular question so that there may be no doubt on what the dispute is. The judgment, then proceeding issue-wise would be able to tell precisely how the dispute was decided.";