Syed HASSAN SHAH vs MALOOK SHAH and anotherOpponents
This civil revision application challenges the judgment of the first appellate court, which dismissed the applicant's appeal and affirmed the trial court's decree. The core legal question was whether the first appellate court erred by failing to address all issues of law and fact framed by the trial court, instead focusing solely on one issue (Issue No. 9). The applicant argued that this omission violated the procedural requirements for appellate judgments. The High Court held that under the relevant procedural rules, an appellate court is obligated to state the points for determination and provide a decision on them. By failing to address the multiple issues decided by the trial court, the appellate court's judgment was deficient. Consequently, the High Court set aside the appellate judgment and remanded the case, directing the first appellate court to rehear the appeal and decide the matter issue-wise. The key principle laid down is that an appellate court must comprehensively address the points for determination, which typically requires deciding the issues originally framed and adjudicated by the trial court.
- Does an appellate court satisfy the requirements of Order XLI Rule 31, Code of Civil Procedure 1908 if it decides only one issue while ignoring others framed by the trial court?
- Is an appellate court required to decide the issues originally framed by the trial court as points of determination in the appeal?
- What is the consequence of an appellate court failing to discuss all issues of law and fact in its judgment?
- Section 115, Code of Civil Procedure 1908
- Order XLI Rule 31, Code of Civil Procedure 1908
1. ' This Revision Application under section 115, C.P.C. Is filed by the plaintiff/applicant against the judgment of the first appellate Court dated 19-4-1978 dismissing the appeal of the applicant and confirming the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the applicant in this Revision is that the learned first appellate Court while dismissing the appeal did not discuss several issues of law and facts framed by the trial Court in the suit and only decided one issue namely issue No. 9 in the suit. Reliance in this connection has been placed by the learned counsel on Rule 31 of Order XLI, C.P.C. Which requires that the judgment of the appellate Court shall state the points for determination, and the decision thereof. It is quite clear from the record that as many as 16 issues of law and facts were framed in the original suit and the learned trial Court has given decision on each of these issues separately. In these circumstances the leaned first appellate Court should have either re-framed the issues or should have decided the issues which were originally framed and decided by the trial Court as points of determination in the appeal. As the learned first appellate Court did not decide any of these issues which were decided by the learned trial Court except issue No.9, I accept this Revision Application, set aside the judgment of the first appellate Court and remand the case back with the direction that the learned first appellate Court should re-hear the appeal and decide the same issue-wise.
2. There will be no order as to costs in the circumstances of the case. As the appeal was instituted in the year 1 974 the learned first appellate Court will make every effort to dispose of this appeal within three months from the date of receipt of R and P.
Cited by 20 cases
- JAVED & 19 others vs ABDUL RASHID & 4 others 2015 PLJ AJ&K 179
- JAVED and 19 others vs ABDUL RASHID and 4 others 2015 PLJ AJ&K 179, 2015 YLR 1362
- MUHAMMAD YOUSIF through L.Rs. vs MUHAMMAD USMAN 2014 YLR 403
- ASLAM RAZA vs MUHAMMAD NAWAZ 2001 CLC 730
- KARACHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and 2 others vs TAJ MAHAL NURSERY and 3 others 2000 CLC 1352
- MUHAMMAD And Another vs MUHAMMAD UMAR And Other 1997 MLD 2830
- MUHAMMAD Versus MUHAMMAD UMAR 1997 MLD 2499
- Haji MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM JALALANI vs Syed IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN and another 1993 PLD Karachi 296
- BAGH ALIPctitioner vs P.O. SINDH and others 1992 CLC 1407
- Mst. INAYAT BIBI vs NAZIR AHMAD and others 1991 CLC 1660
- MUHAMMAD ASHRAF vs Syed GHULAM MURTAZA and others 1993 CLC 185
- MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM vs Mst. MEHMOODA 1991 CLC 1795
- ABDUL HAMEED vs MUHAMMAD ZAKI and 3 others 1990 MLD 1129
- AMIR BAKHSH and anothers vs MUHAMMAD RAMZAN and 3 others 1990 MLD 245
- Malik MUHAMMAD TUFAIL and another vs FAUJI FERTILIZER CO. LTD. through AttorneyGeneral and Marketing Manager 2000 CLC 1838
- Malik MUHAMMAD TUFAIL and another vs M/s. FAUJI FERTILIZER COMPANY 2001 C.L.R. 180
- EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, C&W, MANSEHRA and 2 others vs MUHAMMAD NASIM 2002 CLC 42'i
- YAQOOB through Legal Heirss vs MUHAMMAD JUMAN alias ALLAH RAKHIO 2004 PLD Karachi 543
- Ovais Akhtar & 5 Others, Ovais Akhtar & 4 Others vs Abdullah and another, Zohra Khanum and others 2023 SHC 78
- EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, C&W, MANSEHRA Versus MUHAMMAD NASIM KHAN 2002 CLC 427