Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – s.100 – Second appeal (S.A. No.140/2016) was allowed ex parte vide order dated 01.07.2019 without hearing the appellant-defendant no.3 and without formulating any substantial question of law – Review thereagainst was dismissed vide order dated 11.10.2019 – By way of the impugned order, High Court rejected the application seeking recall of the said order:
Held: Appellant who was the successful defendant before the Trial Court as well as the first Appellate Court was not served in the second appeal by the High Court in S.A. No.140/2016 which was filed by the respondent no.1-plaintiff – There has been a miscarriage of justice as the appellant was not heard in second appeal and it was allowed without framing any substantial question of law at all – Therefore, there has been an error in passing of the judgment dated 01.07.2019 by the High Court in S.A. No.140/2016 – Further, the dismissal of the Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.41568/2019, filed against the judgment in the Second Appeal, as well as the Review Petition (Diary) No. 56394/2024 by this Court would not come in the way of the reconsideration of the second appeal by the High Court – In the peculiar facts of this case, the impugned order dated 05.01.2021, 11.10.2019 and judgment dated 01.07.2019 are set aside – S.A. No.140/2016 is restored on the file of the High Court. [Paras 27-30]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.