MOTILAL DAULATRAM BORA AND ORS. versus MURLIDHAR RAMCHANDRA BHUTABE (SINCE DECEASED) BY HIS LRS. AND ORS.

MOTILAL DAULATRAM BORA AND ORS. versus MURLIDHAR RAMCHANDRA BHUTABE (SINCE DECEASED) BY HIS LRS. AND ORS.

The High Court was not justified in reversing the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the trial and appellate courts, as both courts had extensively considered the documentary and oral evidence. Appointment of a Commissioner by the High Court was improper where a prior Commissioner's report had been rejected at trial, and the existence and width of the road were fully addressed by the lower courts.

Parties
Appellants: Motilal Daulatram Bora and others; Respondents: Murlidhar Ramchandra Bhutabe (since deceased) by his LRs and others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
16 April 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Bombay High Court Judgment Dated 10.4.74 in S.a. No. 698 of 1965
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Concurrent Findings, Second Appeal, Appointment of Commissioner, Findings of Fact
Civil Procedure Concurrent Findings Second Appeal Appointment of Commissioner Findings of Fact

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Motilal Daulatram Bora and others

Appellants

Murlidhar Ramchandra Bhutabe (since deceased) by his LRs and others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Bombay High Court Judgment Dated 10.4.74 in S.a. No. 698 of 1965

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court was justified in interfering with the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the trial court and appellate court regarding the width and existence of a common road

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court was not justified in reversing the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the trial and appellate courts, as both courts had extensively considered the documentary and oral evidence. Appointment of a Commissioner by the High Court was improper where a prior Commissioner's report had been rejected at trial, and the existence and width of the road were fully addressed by the lower courts.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The judgment and decree of the High Court is set aside.
  • The judgment and decree of the courts below stand confirmed.