Case Note & Summary
The case involved a civil appeal concerning the name of the plaintiff's father, which was disputed between the parties. The plaintiff, Vasanti, had recorded his father's name as Batti Lal in documents when he was recruited in the Telegraphs Workshop in 1946. However, the High Court, in a second appeal, reversed the concurrent findings of the trial Court and the first appellate Court, declaring the father's name to be Lalmun. The Supreme Court examined the issue and noted that the High Court's interference with the findings of fact was not permissible under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Court emphasized that the High Court should not overturn established facts in second appeals. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order, restoring the findings of the trial Court and the first appellate Court, and allowed the appeal without costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Findings of Fact - High Court's Interference - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 100 - The High Court reversed concurrent findings of fact regarding the plaintiff's father's name, which is not permissible in second appeals. The Supreme Court restored the findings of the trial Court and the first appellate Court, emphasizing the principle that the High Court cannot interfere with established facts in second appeals. Held that the name of the plaintiff's father is Batti Lal (Paras Not mentioned).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the name of the plaintiff's father is Batti Lal or Lalmun
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order and restored the findings of the trial Court and the first appellate Court, allowing the appeal without costs.
Law Points
- Findings of fact
- Second appeal
- High Court interference
