Skip to content


SamIn Hasan Vs. Piran - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1908)ILR30All319
AppellantSamIn Hasan
RespondentPiran
Excerpt:
civil procedure code, section 574 and 551 - procedure--appeal summarily dismissed--court not bound to record a full judgment. - - the court of first instance dismissed the suit finding that the plaintiff had failed to show that the complaint was groundless......so and coming to the conclusion that the learned subordinate judge was right in dismissing the suit. the plaintiff comes here in second appeal.2. it is urged that the judgment of the lower appellate court does not comply with the requirements of section 574 of the code. the learned advocate for the appellant relies on the decision of the calcutta high court in rami delta v. brojo naik saikia (1897) i.l.r. 25 calc. 97 as an authority for holding that the provisions of section 574 of the code apply to a judgment dismissing an appeal under section 551. with all deference to the learned judges who decided that case, we are not prepared to hold that the provisions of section 574 are applicable in their entirety to the case of an appeal dismissed under section 551. we think this is evident.....
Judgment:

William Burkitt and Aikman, JJ.

1. The appellant brought a suit against the respondent claiming damages for malicious prosecution. The defendant pleaded that the complaint which he had lodged in the Criminal Court was true. The Court of first instance dismissed the suit finding that the plaintiff had failed to show that the complaint was groundless. The plaintiff appealed. The learned District Judge sent for the record, and, after hearing the appellant's pleader, dismissed the appeal summarily under Section 551 of the Code of Civil Procedure, giving brief reasons for doing so and coming to the conclusion that the learned Subordinate Judge was right in dismissing the suit. The plaintiff comes here in second appeal.

2. It is urged that the judgment of the lower appellate Court does not comply with the requirements of Section 574 of the Code. The learned advocate for the appellant relies on the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Rami Delta v. Brojo Naik Saikia (1897) I.L.R. 25 Calc. 97 as an authority for holding that the provisions of Section 574 of the Code apply to a judgment dismissing an appeal under Section 551. With all deference to the learned Judges who decided that case, we are not prepared to hold that the provisions of Section 574 are applicable in their entirety to the case of an appeal dismissed under Section 551. We think this is evident from the immediately preceding sections, and in particular Section 571. In the present case it appears that the learned Judge had the record before him and heard the appellant's pleader. There is nothing to show that he did not apply his mind to the facts of the case and the grounds taken before him. We dismiss the appeal, but without costs, as the respondent is not represented.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //