CASE TITLE:
SATHYANATH & ANR VS V. SAROJAMANI
DATE OF ORDER:
06TH MAY,2022
JUDGE(S):
Hon’ble Justice V. Ramasubramanian and Hemant Gupta
PARTIES:
PETITIONERS: SATHYANATH
RESPONDENT: SAROJAMANI
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS
Order XIV Rule 2 of the 1908 Code of Civil Procedure; Order XIV Rule 2, Order XX Rule 5, Order XLI Rules 24 & 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; Order XLI Rules 24 and 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
SUBJECT
Preliminary issues are those where no evidence is required and, based on a reading of the plaint or the applicable law, if the Court's jurisdiction or the bar to the suit is established, the Court may decide such issues with the sole goal of reaching an expeditious decision.
BRIEF FACTS
- In this case, the defendant in a suit filed an application to frame issues under Order XIV Rule 2(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure to treat Res Judicata and Estoppel principles as preliminary issues.
- The application was denied by the Trial Court. This order was challenged in a revision petition filed before the High Court under Article 227 of the Indian Constitution, which then ordered the issue of res judicata to be framed as a preliminary issue.
- The appellant contended that, under Order XIV Rule 2 of the Code, a Court is required to render judgement on all issues, even if the suit can be resolved on a preliminary issue.
- The bench acknowledged that the provisions of Order XIV Rule 2 are procedural law, but the fact remains that such procedural law was enacted to ensure timely disposition of the lis.
- The court said the possibility of remand can be avoided if findings on preliminary issue are set aside, as was the language prior to the unamended Order XIV Rule 2. If the issue is a mixed issue of law and fact, or if the issue of law is dependent on the factual decision, it cannot be tried as a rreliminary issue. In other words, preliminary issues are those where no evidence is required and, based on a reading of the plaint or the applicable law, if the Court's jurisdiction or the bar to the suit is established, the Court may decide such issues with the sole goal of reaching an expeditious decision.
ANALYSIS BY THE COURT
- As a result, the bench concluded that the High Court's directive to frame a preliminary issue on the issue of res judicata is not desirable in order to expedite the resolution of the lis between the parties.
- The purpose of Order XIV Rule 2 of the Code was to require the Court to render judgments on all issues subject to the provisions of sub-Rule (2).
- However, if issues of both law and fact arise in the same suit and the Court believes that the case or any part of it can be decided on an issue of law only, it may try that suit first, if it relates to the Court's jurisdiction or is a bar to the suit created 21 by the Court.
CONCLUSION
The High Court's order remanding the case to the learned trial court to frame preliminary issues contradicts the mandate of Order XIV Rule 2 of the Code and is thus unsustainable in law. The learned trial court must record findings on all issues so that the first appellate court can rely on them and avoid the possibility of remand if the suit is decided only on the preliminary issue. As a result, the appeal is granted. The High Court's decision is hereby reversed.
Learn the practical aspects of CrPC HERE, CPC HERE, IPC HERE, Evidence Act HERE, Family Laws HERE, DV Act HERE
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
