Ram Kumar & Ors. vs Abhinandan Kumar Tadaiya (D) Th. Lrs. & Ors
- SCC(2016) 16 SCC 647
- Neutral2015 INSC 717
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where the High Court purports to find that no material was available on record before it or the trial court regarding a plea, but material in fact exists on the record and was available to be considered, the High Court's judgment dismissing a revision petition on that ground is liable to be set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration where the High Court may examine the material actually available on the record and decide the matter afresh in accordance with law.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
1. Leave granted. This appeal has been preferred against judgment and order dated 5th January, 2012 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad passed in Civil Revision No.339 of 1992 arising out of eviction proceedings initiated against the appellants (tenants) by the respondents (landlords) on the ground of arrears of rent from 14th February, 1984 to 14th June, 1990. The courts below have upheld the claim for eviction holding the appellants to be defaulters.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. It has been pointed out by learned counsel for the appellants that following finding has been recorded by the High Court while dismissing the revision petition by the impugned order:-
“Admittedly, there is no material before this Court nor was produced before the trial Court with regard to those proceedings and therefore, no notice of the said plea can be taken. Any other point was not pressed. There is no merit in the revision.”
4. It is pointed out that the above finding has been recorded without considering the material which was available on record. Attention of the Court has been drawn to Chart (Annexure P-6 (Colly.) at page 41 of the Paper Book, which purports to depict details of the rent deposited in Court showing inter alia as follows:-
|Khafifa ADJ. (Daketi) | | | |Case No.5/1990 | | | |Oct 1987-30 Sep 1990 |6075 |14/09/90 |
5. Since there is nothing in the impugned order showing consideration of the aforesaid material, we allow this appeal, set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the High Court for a fresh decision.
6. The parties are directed to appear before the High Court for fresh proceedings on October 26, 2015.
7. The High Court may look into the material on record which may be pointed out by the parties and take a decision in accordance with law expeditiously.
…………..……..…………………………….J. [ T. S. THAKUR ]
…………..….………………………………..J. [ ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ] NEW DELHI SEPTEMBER 30, 2015
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free