First Appellate Court Has To Follow Requirements Of Order 41 Rule 31 CPC & Pass Reasoned Judgment: Rajasthan HC
The Rajasthan High Court held that the Appellate Court is obligated to pass a reasoned judgment in accordance with the requirements of Order 41 Rule 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).
The Court was considering a petition against the Judgment of the Board of Revenue which had allowed an appeal setting aside a previous judgment by the Revenue Appellate Tribunal (RAA) and remanding the matter for a fresh decision.
A Bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand held, “The Appellate Court is supposed to pass a reasoned judgment keeping with the requirements of Order 41 Rule 31 CPC. Indeed, this being a mandatory requirement of law, it’s non-compliance by the Appellate Court renders the judgment bad in law.”
Senior Advocate RK Mathur appeared for the Petitioners and Advocate Saurabh Bhandari appeared for the Respondents.
The petitioner contended that the Board's decision to remand the case was based on a technicality—specifically, that the RAA did not follow the procedural requirements of Order 41 Rule 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), which outlined the contents that an appellate court's judgment should include.
The issue before the Court was, “Whether it is necessary for the First Appellate Court to decide the appeal in accordance with the procedure contained under Order 41 Rule 31 CPC?”
The Court supported the Board's decision, emphasizing the importance of compliance with Order 41 Rule 31 CPC. The Court said, “It is settled proposition of law that the appeal is continuation of the proceedings of the original court. Ordinarily, the appellate jurisdiction involves re-hearing on law as well as on fact and is invoked by the aggrieved person. The first appeal is a valuable right of the appellant and therein all questions of fact and law, decided by the trial court, are open for re-consideration.”
The Court cited several Supreme Court judgments that highlighted the need for appellate courts to address all issues, provide reasons for their decisions, and follow procedural guidelines. The Court added, “Hon’ble Apex Court has consistently emphasized the need for assigning reasons in support of its conclusion and while doing so the Court must deal with all the issues raised by the parties to the lis.”
In its analysis, the Court concluded that the RAA's judgment did not meet the requirements of Order 41 Rule 31 CPC, justifying the Board's decision to remand the case for a fresh decision. The Court added, “The judgment passed by RAA does not satisfy the requirement of Order 41 Rule 31 CPC, hence it is legally unsustainable. Hence, the Board of Revenue has rightly directed the RAA, to decide the issues, on the basis of the evidence available on the record.”
The Court dismissed the petitioner's claims, including any pending applications, and upheld the Board's judgment.
Cause Title: Ramsahay & Anr. v. Shyopyari Devi & Ors.
Click here to read/download Judgment
