OM PRAKASH versus AMARJIT SINGH & ANR.

OM PRAKASH versus AMARJIT SINGH & ANR.

Since the remand order had assumed finality without appeal, the jurisdiction on remand was confined to its terms. However, having regard to principles of equity and justice, the court set aside the decrees below and remitted the suit for fresh disposal, granting both parties the opportunity to adduce evidence afresh and recall witnesses for cross-examination.

Parties
Appellant: OM PRAKASH; Respondent: AMARJIT SINGH; Respondent: AMARJIT SINGH & ANR.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 August 1988
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Punjab and Haryana High Court Order in Regular Second Appeal No. 2569 of 1987
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Specific Performance of Contract, Remand Orders, Ex Parte Proceedings

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

OM PRAKASH

Appellant

AMARJIT SINGH

Respondent

AMARJIT SINGH & ANR.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Punjab and Haryana High Court Order in Regular Second Appeal No. 2569 of 1987

  1. 1 Whether appellant is entitled to adduce fresh evidence and recall witnesses examined ex parte on remand
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to grant specific performance

Ratio Decidendi

Since the remand order had assumed finality without appeal, the jurisdiction on remand was confined to its terms. However, having regard to principles of equity and justice, the court set aside the decrees below and remitted the suit for fresh disposal, granting both parties the opportunity to adduce evidence afresh and recall witnesses for cross-examination.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Decrees of lower courts set aside
  • Suit remitted to trial court for fresh disposal