FIROJUNNISA Vs. HASMUNNISA
LAWS(ALL)-2021-12-136
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on December 06,2021

Firojunnisa Appellant
VERSUS
Hasmunnisa Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

H.K.N. SWAMI V. IRSHAD BASITH (DEAD [REFERRED TO]
JAGANNATH V. ARULAPPA [JAGANNATH V. ARULAPPA [REFERRED TO]
HARI SHANKAR V. RAO GIRDHARI LAL CHOWDHURY [REFERRED TO]
RAJESHWARI AND OTHERS VS. SMT. MEHARUNNISHAN [REFERRED TO]
THAKUR SUKHPAL SINGH VS. THAKUR KALYAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
GIRIJANANDINI DEVI VS. BIJENDRA NARAIN CHOUDHARY [REFERRED TO]
SHANKAR RAMCHANDRA ABHYANKAR VS. KRISHNAJI DATTATREYA BAPAT [REFERRED TO]
RAJA LAKSHMI DYEING WORKS VS. RANGASWAMY CHETTIAR [REFERRED TO]
SANTOSH HAZARI VS. PURUSHOTTAM TIWARI [REFERRED TO]
MADHUKAR VS. SANGRAM [REFERRED TO]
G AMALORPAVAM VS. R C DIOCESE OF MADURAI [REFERRED TO]
GANNMANI ANASUYA VS. PARVATINI AMARENDRA CHOWDHARY [REFERRED TO]
SHIV KUMAR SHARMA VS. SANTOSH KUMARI [REFERRED TO]
B V NAGESH VS. H V SREENIVASA MURTHY [REFERRED TO]
B M NARAYANA GOWDA VS. SHANTHAMMA [REFERRED TO]
KURIAN CHACKO VS. VARKEY OUSEPH [REFERRED TO]
VINOD KUMAR VS. GANGADHAR [REFERRED TO]
SHASIDHAR VS. ASHWINI UMA MATHAD [REFERRED TO]
MALLURU MALLAPPA VS. KURUVATHAPPA [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

JASPREET SINGH, J. - (1.)Heard Shri Prashant Jaiswal, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Nazam Zafar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
(2.)The instant second appeal has been preferred by the defendant- appellant against the judgment and decree dtd. 4/4/1983 passed by the 4th Additional District Judge, Gonda in Civil Appeal No.292 of 1980, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent dismissed by the trial court was set aside and the appeal was allowed decreeing the suit in part. The instant second appeal was admitted on the following two substantial questions of law:-
"(i) As to whether while exercising powers under Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, it was open to the court below to set aside the findings of fact recorded by the said court in earlier judgment. Regarding these findings no grievance was made in the review petition and also no prayer was made for the review of the said findings in the review petition?. (ii) As to whether the First Appellate Court could have reversed the finding of the trial court without considering the evidence, meeting the reasons of the trial court and was it sound a exercise of jurisdiction in terms of Sec. 96 read with Sec. 41 Rule 31 CPC.?"

(3.)In order to answer the aforesaid questions, certain brief facts giving rise to the instant appeal are being noticed first.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.