Summary
The High Court had remitted a first appeal on the ground that the first appellate court failed to frame points for determination under Order XLI Rule 31 CPC, treating the Rule as mandatory. The Supreme Court disagreed: non-compliance with Rule 31 does not by itself vitiate the judgment if there is substantial compliance, and the Rule requires the particulars only where the appellant actually raised points for determination.
Issues
- Whether a first appellate court's failure to frame points for determination under Order XLI Rule 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 vitiates its judgment and renders it void.
Provisions considered
- Order XLI Rule 31, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908Rule 31 requires an appellate judgment to state the points for determination, the decision, the reasons and the relief. Following G. Amalorpavam v. R.C. Diocese of Madurai, the Court held that substantial compliance is to be judged from the nature of each judgment and non-compliance does not by itself make the judgment void; read reasonably, the Rule calls for these particulars only when the appellant has actually raised points for determination. (¶¶ 4, 5, 6, 7, 12)
- Order XLI Rule 30, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908Relied on to fortify the reading of Rule 31: the appellate court may, but need not, refer to the proceedings of the court below; if the appellant submits nothing, it can decide the appeal without such reference and simply record that nothing was urged to show the decree was wrong. (¶¶ 13, 14)
Held
- Order XLI Rule 31 CPC is not so mandatory that a failure to frame points for determination vitiates the appellate judgment and makes it wholly void. Whether there has been substantial compliance depends on the nature of the judgment in each case, and non-compliance may be ignored where there is substantial compliance. (¶¶ 5, 6, 7)
- It is the appellant's duty to show that the judgment under appeal is erroneous; only after that does the appellate court call on the respondent to reply, and only then can its judgment contain all the matters listed in Rule 31. A code of procedure is designed to facilitate justice and should not be construed so technically as to frustrate it. (¶¶ 9, 10, 11)
- Rule 31 should be reasonably construed to require the stated particulars only when the appellant has actually raised points for determination before the appellate court, and not when no such points are raised. (¶ 12)
- Under Order XLI Rule 30 the appellate court has discretion whether to refer to the proceedings below; if the appellant submits nothing for consideration, it may decide the appeal without such reference and simply record that nothing was urged to show the decree under appeal was wrong. (¶¶ 13, 14)
Result
Leave granted; appeal allowed; the High Court's judgment partly allowing the second appeal and remitting the matter to the first appellate court set aside; pending applications disposed of.