Unexplained Possession Of Stolen Ornaments Soon After Murder Attracts Presumption Of Guilt Under Section 114 Evidence Act: Madras High Court Identical Pay Scale Cannot Be Basis To Confer Benefits Meant Specifically For Scientists: Gauhati High Court Suit For Partition Not Maintainable Without Seeking Cancellation Of Registered Partition Deed Signed By Plaintiff: Karnataka High Court Law Officers Have No Vested Right To Complete 3-Year Tenure, State Can Terminate Services Early: Orissa High Court Carpenter With Amputated Leg Suffers 100% Functional Disability As Trade Requires Squatting & Sitting Position: Supreme Court Fatal Fall Into Dry Canal During Scuffle Attracts Section 304 Part II IPC: Supreme Court Reduces Sentence To Period Undergone Minor Rape Victim Permitted To Terminate 28-Week Pregnancy: Delhi High Court Cites Right To Bodily Autonomy Under Article 21 Investigation Initiated Without FIR Registration Illegal; Prosecution Documents Prepared After Trap Proceedings 'Table Investigation': Andhra Pradesh High Court Successive Writ Petitions On Same Cause Of Action Barred By Constructive Res Judicata: Bombay High Court Dismisses BPCL's Challenge To Octroi Levy Court Fees Must Be Refunded If Commercial Suit Is Rejected For Non-Compliance With Pre-Institution Mediation: Calcutta High Court Deduction Under Section 80-I Must Be Computed On Profits And Gains Without Reducing Investment Deposit Claim Under Section 32AB: Gujarat High Court Employee’s Right To Appeal Not Lost If Disciplinary Action Initiated By Higher Authority Provided Further Appeal Lies To Superior Body: Kerala High Court Preceding 10-Year Period For Charge Sheets Mandatory To Invoke 'Organized Crime' Under Section 111 BNS: J&K High Court Grants Bail PIL Petitioners Doubted By Court Must Annex Previous Adverse Orders In Future Filings: Kerala High Court Shifting Drug Traffickers To Distant States Necessary To Disrupt Supply Chains: Calcutta High Court Upholds PITNDPS Detention

High Court Sets Aside Trial Court's 'Unjust' Order, Directs Framing of Specific Additional Issue

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has set aside a trial court order, terming it as "unjust" and emphasizing the "duty of the trial Court to frame specific issues based on pleadings." The judgement was delivered by Justice Amarjot Bhatti on September 25, 2023.

Malkit Singh, the petitioner, had approached the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to challenge an order of the trial court. The latter had dismissed his application for framing additional issues in a civil suit for recovery based on a pro-note and a receipt. The respondent, Balwinder Singh, had contested the suit and claimed that the documents were forged and fraudulent. Despite this specific stand, the trial court failed to frame an issue on it, stating it was already covered under an existing issue.

Justice Bhatti, while delivering the judgement, observed, "It is the duty of the trial Court to frame issues on the basis of pleadings of the parties." The High Court further stated that "once a specific stand was taken by the defendant, the Court was required to frame specific issue on the same."

The Court accepted the civil revision petition filed by Malkit Singh and directed the trial court to frame an additional issue concerning the stand taken by the defendant in preliminary objection No. 3.

The judgement came as a relief to the petitioner, represented by Advocate Mr. Lakhwinder Singh Mann, who had argued that the trial court's failure to frame specific issues based on the defendant's preliminary objections was unjust and violated the principles of natural justice.

Date of Decision: 25.09.2023

Malkit Singh vs Balwinder Singh 

 

Latest Legal News