Case Note & Summary
The case arises from a money suit filed by Madhusudan Radheshyam Jopat (appellant) against Laxmanrao Vithobaji Samarit (respondent) for recovery of Rs.1,00,000/- based on a promissory note dated 26.11.1999. The trial court (Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kamptee) decreed the suit on 19.8.2009, directing the defendant to pay the principal amount with 6% interest from the date of suit. The defendant appealed to the District Judge, Nagpur (Regular Civil Appeal No.486 of 2009). The first appellate court, by judgment dated 6.3.2013, set aside the decree and dismissed the suit, holding that the plaintiff had not paid the loan amount. The appellant contended that he was not heard by the first appellate court before the decree was set aside. The respondent argued that the appeal, initially dismissed for default, was restored and reheard. However, the High Court found that the appellant was not given an opportunity of hearing, as the restoration proceedings were not communicated to him. The High Court held that the first appellate court's judgment violated principles of natural justice and was unsustainable. The court set aside the appellate judgment and remanded the matter to the first appellate court for fresh hearing, directing both parties to appear on 23.6.2014. The second appeal was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Natural Justice - Right to be Heard - Section 96 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - First appellate court set aside trial court's money decree without hearing the appellant (original plaintiff) - Held that failure to afford opportunity of hearing violates principles of natural justice and renders the appellate judgment unsustainable - Matter remanded for fresh hearing (Paras 1-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the first appellate court could set aside a money decree without hearing the original plaintiff/appellant, and whether such action violates principles of natural justice.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the second appeal, set aside the judgment of the first appellate court dated 6.3.2013, and remanded the matter to the first appellate court for fresh hearing after affording opportunity to both parties. Parties directed to appear on 23.6.2014. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Principles of Natural Justice
- Right to be heard
- Appellate Court's duty to hear both parties
- Section 96 Code of Civil Procedure
- 1908
