Devraj Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

AFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Second Appeal No. 520 of 2014 Devraj Singh S/o Brijkishore Singh, Aged about 41 years, R/o Bodla, Tahsil Bodla, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

---Appellant/Plaintiff

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, through the Collector, Kabirdham, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

--- Respondent/Defendant For Appellant :- Mr. H.B. Agrawal, Senior Advocate with Ms. Richa Dwivedi, Advocate For State :- Mr. Ravi Bhagat, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 02/12/2020

1. This plaintiff's second appeal was admitted for hearing on 17/11/2020 by formulating the following substantial question of law :- "Whether the first appellate Court is justified in dismissing the appeal summarily under Order 41 Rule 11 sub-rule (1) of CPC without complying the Order 41 Rule 11 subrule (4) of CPC by recording the findings which is perverse to the record ?"

[For the sake of convenience, the parties will herein-after be referred to as per their status shown before the trial Court.]

2. Plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction against the State after his claim having been rejected by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) in a proceeding initiated under Section 57(2) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959.

3. The said suit filed by the plaintiff was dismissed by the trial Court finding no merit against which the plaintiff preferred an appeal before the first appellate Court under Section 96 of CPC wherein learned first appellate Court, by its impugned order, summarily dismissed the appeal under Order 41 Rule 11(1) of CPC after granting the application filed under Order 13 Rule 5 and 6 of CPC and marking the said document as Exhibit P/26 against which this second appeal has been preferred by the appellant/plaintiff under Section 100 of CPC in which substantial question of law has been framed and set out in the opening paragraph of this judgment.

4. Mr. H.B. Agrawal, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/plaintiff, would submit that if the first appellate Court was of the opinion that the appeal deserves to be dismissed summarily under Order 41 Rule 11(1) of CPC then he was required to record its brief ground for doing

so and he ought to have delivered the judgment in terms of Order 41 Rule 11(4) of the CPC. In absence of that, the impugned order passed by the first appellate Court deserves to be set aside. He would also submit that several grounds have been raised by the appellant/plaintiff in the memo of appeal which clearly show that the appeal is arguable and it could not have been dismissed which is in violation of Order 41 Rule 11(4) of CPC.

5. Mr. Ravi Bhagat, learned State counsel, would support the impugned judgment passed by the first appellate Court and submit that the second appeal deserves to be dismissed.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made hereinabove and perused the records with utmost circumspection.

7. Order 41 Rule 11 states as under :- O.41, R.11. Power to dismiss the appeal without sending notice to Lower Court. - [(1) The Appellate Court after fixing a day for hearing the appellant or his pleader and hearing him accordingly if he appears on that day may dismiss the appeal.]

(2) If on that day fixed or any other day to which the hearing may be adjourned the appellant does not appear when the appeal is called on for hearing, the Court may make an order that the appeal be dismissed.

(3) The dismissal of an appeal under this rule shall be notified to the Court from whose decree the appeal is preferred.

[(4) Where an Appellate Court, not being the High Court, dismisses an appeal under subrule (1), it shall deliver a judgment, recording in brief its grounds for doing so, and a decree shall be drawn up in accordance with the judgment.]"

8. A careful perusal of the aforesaid provision would show that Order 41 Rule (1) of CPC empowers the first appellate Court to dismiss the appeal summarily, but that is subject to sub-rule (4) of Rule 11 which mandates that where an appellate Court, not being the High Court, dismisses an appeal under sub-rule (1), it shall deliver a judgment, recording in brief its grounds for doing so, and a decree shall be drawn up in accordance with the judgment.

9. Therefore, the first appellate Court was required to record in brief, its grounds for dismissing the appeal summarily and in absence of that, the impugned judgment is liable to be questioned.

10. In the matter of Jayanmati De and Anr. v. Abani Kanta Barat and Ors.1, Their Lordships of the Supreme Court held that the High Court though not required under sub-rule (4) to record its grounds for doing so, but the sub-rule does not give full discretionary powers to avoid recording any reasons whatsoever and thereafter, remitted the 1 AIR 2000 SC 3578(2)

matter for hearing and disposal in accordance with law.

11. In the instant case, the first appellate Court was required to record its brief reasons for dismissing the appeal summarily whereas the impugned order states as under :- 10/10/2014 अपपीललारቕኍ दलारला शपी एस.एस. पलाठक अधधिवकला । अपपीललारቕኍ अधधिवकला दलारला पलारभभिक तकर भकये गये, तकर शवण भकयला गयला। इसपी स्तर पर अपपीललारቕኍ अधधिवकला नये आदयेश 13 भनयम 05 एवर 06 व्य.प.सर.

कये तहत आवयेदन प्ቔ पस्तुत भकयला भक, अधिपीनस्र न्यलायलालय म ्ቔतुभटिवश, उनकये दलारला पस्तुत भकये गये दस्तलावयेज पर पदशर अरभकत नहीሻ भकयला गयला है इसधलये अधिपीनस्र न्यलायलालय नये उसये अगला्ቨ मलानला है । भनस्तलार प्ቔक ककी सत्यपभतधलभप पस्तुत है । अततः उस पर पृषलारकन भकये जलानये कला, भनवयेदन भकयला है । तकर सतुनये गये तरला अपपील जलापन एवर अधिपीनस्र न्यलायलालय कये अभभिलयेख कला अवललोकन भकयला गयला, उक दस्तलावयेज ककी सत्यपभतधलभप तहसपीलदलार दलारला हस्तला्ቌररत कर, तपीन पभत म नक्शला सभहत पस्तुत भकयला गयला है, अततः आवयेदन प्ቔ स्वपीकलार कर, दस्तलावयेज पर पदशर पपी-20 अरभकत भकयला गयला । उक पदशर पपी-26 पर दस्तलावयेजपी सलाቌኚय हलोनये सये ममौधखक सलाቌኚय ककी कलोई भिपी आवश्यकतला नहीሻ है, उक दस्तलोवजोሞ कये सरबरधि म अधधिवकला कये पलारभभिक तकर सतुनये गये ह, अततः पलारभभिक तकर कला भनरलाकरण करतये समय दस्तलावयेज पर हपी भवचलार भकयला जलावयेगला । अपपीललारቕኍ अधधिवकला नये पदशर पपी-26 सरभहतला अपपील जलापन पर अपनये पलारभभिक तकर पस्तुत भकयला एवर अरभतम तकर हयेतु अपपील स्वपीकलार भकये जलानये कला भनवयेदन भकयला। अधिपीनस्र न्यलायलालय कये अभभिलयेख व्यवहलार वलाद क.

16 अ/12 दयेवरलाज भव. छतपीसगढ़ शलासन म उपलब्धि आदयेश पभ्ቔकला, सलाቌኚय एवर समस्त दस्तलावयेजोሞ कला अवललोकन भकयला गयला । अपपीललारቕኍ नये अपनये अपपील मला्ቔ एक हपी आधिलार पर पस्तुत भकयला है भक, अधिपीनस्र न्यलायलालय नये भनस्तलार प्ቔक म पदशर नहीሻ डलालला है, सलार हपी खसरला नम्बर 570 रकबला 04.54 एकड़ भिभूभम म तहसपीलदलार कये आदयेश कये अरतगरत शलासककीय ररककॉडर म घलास भिभूभम म, दजर हलोनला यला तहसपीलदलार कला आदयेश कला आशय हलोनला, भकसपी भिपी ररककॉडर म नहीሻ है इसपीधलये उसये धलभपक ्ቔतुभटि मलानला जला सकतला है और अखरडनपीय सलाቌኚय कलो स्वपीकलार करन, अपपील स्वपीकलार ककी जलावये । पदशर पपी-26 कये भनस्तलार प्ቔक जलो नक्शला सहपी तपीन पभत म सत्यलाभपत पभतधलभप कये रूप मर पस्तुत भकयला गयला है, उक दस्तलावयेज कला अवललोकन भकयला गयला, धजसम खसरला नम्बर 570 रकबला 04.

करनये कये बलाद भिपी उक दस्तलावयेज कला ललाभि अपपीललारቕኍ कलो पला्቎ नहीሻ हलोतला है । पभतवलादपी कये दलारला वलादपी कये सलाभ्ቌयोሞ कये खरडन म कलोई भिपी सलाቌኚय पस्तुत नहीሻ भकयला गयला है, मला्ቔ इसपी आधिलार पर अपपीललारቕኍ/वलादपी कला दलावला स्वपीकलार नहीሻ भकयला जला सकतला, बसलक जहलाሺ पर दस्तलावयेजपी सलाቌኚय उपलब्धि है, वहलाሺ पर वलादपी ककी ओर सये पस्तुत भकये गये ममौधखक सलाቌኚय कला अवलरबन नहीሻ धलयला जला सकतला। पदशर पपी-16 म वलादपी कये बयेजला-कब्जला कये सरबरधि म उलयेख है, खसरला पलारचशलालला सनत् 1996-97 सये 2000-09 ककी सत्य पभतधलभप म एवर वर 2008-09 म भिपी वलादगस्त भिभूभम घलास हलोनला उलयेधखत है, 1996-97 कये पभूवर कला रलाजला कये समय सये वलादपी कला कब्जला हलोनये कये सरबरधि म कलोई भिपी दस्तलावयेज अभभिलयेख म पस्तुत नहीሻ है, अभतकमण कये सरबरधि म रलाजस्व न्यलायलालय म पभतवयेदन भदयला जलानला, वलादपी कये दलारला पस्तुत भकये गये दस्तलावयेजोሞ सये, दभशरत है । पदशर पपी-11 अनतुभवभिलागपीय अधधिकलारपी बलोड़लला कये दलारला धिलारला 57 (2) भिभू-रलाजस्व सरभहतला कये तहत भदये गये आदयेश म भिपी 02 अक्टिभूबर 1959 सये अधधिभनयम कये असस्तत्व हलोनये ककी अवधधि म अपपीललारቕኍ कलो वलादगस्त भिभूभम पर कलोई अधधिकलारपी पला्቎ रला और भनधिलारररत अभवधधि म कलायरवलाहपी ककी गयपी रपी, इस सरबरधि म कलोई जलानकलारपी पयेश नहीሻ भकये जलानये बलाबत् स्प्ቖ रूप सये उलयेख करतये हये अपपीललारቕኍ कला आवयेदन नस्तपीब्ሾ भकयला गयला है । अधिपीनस्र न्यलायलालय नये वलादपी कये दलारला पस्तुत भकये गये सलाቌኚय एवर दस्तलावयेजपी सलाቌኚय कये आधिलार पर उभचत रूप सये भनष्कर दयेकर भनणरय पलाररत भकयला है, अततः अपपीललारቕኍ ककी अपपील अरभतम तकर सतुनवलायपी हयेत, धलये जलानये यलोग्य नहीሻ पलायला जलातला है, पररणलामस्वरूप अपपीललारቕኍ ककी अपपील खलाररज ककी जलातपी है । यह पकरण समला्቎ । मभूल अभभिलयेख सभहत अभभिलयेखलागलार पयेभरत भकयला जलावये । आदयेश ककी पभत, आदयेश सये अवगत हलोनये हयेतु परम व्यवहलार न्यलायलाधिपीश वगर-01, कबपीरधिलाम कलो पयेभरत भकयला जलावये । सहपी/- (भकरण चतुवरदपी) फलास्टि टिटहैक कलोटिर आफ अपर धजलला न्यलायलाधिपीश, कबपीरधिलाम

12. A careful perusal of the aforesaid order would show that the first appellate Court simply granted the application under Order 13 Rule 5 and 6 of CPC for producing the document and marked it as Exhibit P/26 and thereafter, dismissed the appeal, finding that the judgment and decree of the trial Court is based on oral and documentary evidence on record, without recording any reason as mandated

by Order 41 Rule 11(4) of CPC in shape of the judgment whereas the grounds making the appeal arguable have been raised which has not been considered by the first appellate Court. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the first appellate Court is bad for two reasons, firstly because it is in non-compliance of Order 41 Rule 11(4) of the CPC and secondly because though several arguable grounds have been raised but the appeal has been dismissed summarily holding that the judgment and decree of the trial Court is based on oral and documentary evidence on record.

13. As a fallout and consequence of the aforesaid legal analysis, the second appeal is allowed to the extent indicated herein-above and the matter is remitted to the first appellate Court for hearing the appeal afresh on merits in accordance with law and its disposal within three months from the date of appearance of the parties. No cost(s).

14. Registry is directed to send the records of the civil appeal to the concerned first appellate Court forthwith.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet