High CourtsSingle Bench

Syed Qudarat Ali and Others vs Abdul Samad

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 22 August 1933 · Citation: (1933) 08 AHC CK 0008

HON’BLE JUDGES
Young, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 41 Rule 31
CASE NUMBER
Second Appeal No. 646 of 1930
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 397 words

Young, J.—This is a second appeal from the decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of Aligarh.

2.

The suit concerned a declaration as to the ownership of a plot. The main complaint about the judgment of the learned Judge of the Court below is that he has thrown out the suit and merely adopted the judgment of the Munsif and gives no reason in accordance with Order 41, Rule 31, Code of CPC for his own decision. I think the criticism is justifiable. I have read the learned Judge''s judgment and it will be extremely difficult to discover from it any reason of his own for dismissing the appeal before him. He in effect says: "I have read the judgment of the lower Court. The Munsif has done his work admirably and I accept his conclusions." That is the real effect of the lower appellate Court''s judgment. This is not in accordance with law-see Sohawan v. Babu Nand (1887) 9 All 26: 1886 All. W.N. 284 [In this case the head note in 9 All. 26 runs as follows: "The judgment of a lower appellate Court, after setting forth the claim, the defense, the nature of the decree of the first Court, and the effect of the pleas in appeal, concluded, with general observations as follows: "The point to be determined on appeal is whether or not the decision is consistent with the merits of the case. this Court, having considered the evidence on the record and the judgment of the Munsif, which is explicit enough, concurs with the lower court.... The finding arrived at by the Munsif, that the Plaintiff''s claim is established, is correct and consistent with the evidence. The pleas urged in appeal are therefore undeserving of co isideration." Held, that this was in law no judgment at all, inasmuch as it did not satisfy (he requirements of Section 574 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and that the decree of the Lower Appellate Court must therefore be set aside, and the record returned to that Court for a proper adjudication, in accordance with the provisions of that section"-Ed]

3.

Further there ought to be a finding as to possession in this matter, for these reasons, let the record be returned to the lower appellate Court for decision of the appeal from the trial Court according to law. The costs will abide the event.