Rachhpal Singh Vs. Sohan Singh [1993] INSC 385 (24 September 1993)
Verma, Jagdish Saran (J) Verma, Jagdish Saran (J) Jeevan Reddy, B.P. (J) Bharucha S.P. (J)
CITATION: 1994 SCC Supl. (2) 544
ACT:
HEAD NOTE:
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard on merits.
3. During the hearing of the second appeal in the High Court, the appellant made an application under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC placing reliance on a receipt dated March 28, 1977 alleged to have been executed by the opposite party. After inquiry conducted by the trial court on the direction of the High Court, a finding was recorded that the said receipt was not a genuine document. The High Court affirmed that finding and rejected the receipt as forged and fabricated.
It also directed prosecution of the appellant for the same.
It is obvious that on that conclusion reached by the High Court, after rejecting the application under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC, the second appeal had to be heard and decided on merits. However, that was not done and after rejecting the application under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC because it was based on a receipt found to be forged, the High Court proceeded to dismiss the appeal itself without considering the merits of the appeal. This was an obvious error on account of which the impugned judgment dismissing the appeal in this manner has to be set aside.
4. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The High Court's judgment, insofar as it relates to the dismissal of the second appeal, is set aside. The second appeal be now heard on merits and decided afresh by the High Court. No costs.
