The Division Bench of Supreme Court today consisting of Justices M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna while strongly disapproving the way High Court disposed of the appeal, held that there cannot be an automatic allowing of the appeal and quashing and setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial court without any further entering the merits of the appeal and/or expressing anything on merits in the appeal on an impleadment of a party in an appeal.
Facts and Procedural History
The appellant herein – original plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs.47,90,088/-, along with interest of 18% from the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein-original defendants. The said suit came to be decreed by the trial court. The judgment and decree passed by the trial court came to be challenged by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 before the High Court. In the said appeal, the said respondents moved a miscellaneous application seeking impleadment of A.P. Transco and MAYTAS Infra Pvt. Ltd. as party respondents to the first appeal on the ground that the subject work, which was given to the defendant No.1 by the appellant, was originally given by A.P. Transco to the appellant.
The High Court by the impugned order without assigning any reasons as to why the proposed respondents must be impleaded in the first appeal, allowed the said application, and directed to implead A.P. Transco as party to the appeal as well as to the original suit. Not only that, while allowing the said application for impleadment, thereafter, without further entering into the merits and/or expressing anything on merits and solely on the ground that as the application for impleadment was allowed, the High Court set aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial court and remanded the matter to the trial court with a direction to the trial court to decide the suit afresh after affording an opportunity to the impleaded party to lead evidence in the suit. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court, the original plaintiff has preferred the present appeal.
Observations of the Court
Having carefully perused the submissions, the Bench observed that:
“This is not the way the High Court was required to deal with the first appeal arising out of the judgment and decree passed by the trial court. Nothing has been observed and/or decided on merits. Even no reasoning has been given why the A.P. Transco was required to be impleaded as a party to the appeal. The High Court has not only directed to implead the A.P. Transco as party to the appeal but has also directed to implead the A.P. Transco in the original suit also….as such whether in the appeal preferred by the original defendants against the judgment and decree passed by the trial court, such an application would be maintainable or not, that itself is a question, which was required to be first considered and decided by the High Court. How to deal with and decide a first appeal u/s 96 and Order XLI Rule 31 of the CPC has been dealt with by this Court in a catena of decisions.”
Judgment
The Bench set aside the order passed by the High Court impleading the A.P. Transco as party to the appeal as well as to the original suit. Consequently, they also set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court quashing and setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial court. They remanded the matter to the High Court to decide and dispose of the CCCAMP and the first appeal in accordance with law and on its own merits. The High Court shall consider whether such an application in the appeal preferred by the original defendants would be maintainable or not and if so under which provision of Code of Civil Procedure it would be maintainable. The appeal was allowed accordingly with exemplary cost, which was quantified at Rs.25,000/- to be deposited by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein with the State Legal Services Authority of the concerned High Court within a period of four weeks from today.
Case Name: IL and FS Engineering and Constructions Company Ltd. vs M/s. Bhargavarama Constructions & Ors.
Citation: Civil Appeal No. 7639 of 2021
Bench: Justice M.R. Shah, Justice B.V. Nagarathna
Decided on: 16th December 2021
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
