[1.0] Present Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as “CPC”) has been preferred by the appellants herein – original defendants to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and decree dated 29.04.1995 passed by the learned trial Court – learned 3rd Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rajkot in Regular Civil Suit No.1707 of 1994 by which the learned trial Court has decreed the said suit by declaring the order of punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority of stoppage of increment for a period of five years as illegal, ineffective, null and void. The appellants herein have also challenged the impugned judgment and order dated 13.12.2001 passed by the learned Appellate Court learned Joint District Judge, Rajkot in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.42 of 1995 by which the learned Appellate Court has without framing any point for determination and without elaborating the matter in detail has dismissed the said Appeal preferred by the appellants herein and has confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court. [2.0] Shri Ashish Dagli, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants has vehemently submitted that as such the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Appellate Court dismissing the Appeal and confirming the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court cannot be sustained as, apart from the fact that the learned Appellate Court has not framed the point of determination as required under Order 41 Rule 31 of the CPC, the learned Appellate Court has not discussed anything on merits more particularly the issue with respect to jurisdiction of the Civil Court and in one paragraph only has disposed of the Appeal which cannot be sustained. It is submitted that though raised, the learned Appellate Court has not considered the issue with respect to jurisdiction of the Civil Court which goes to the root of the matter. Therefore, it is requested to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Appellate Court and remand the matter to the learned Appellate Court to decide the same in accordance with law and on merits.
[3.0] Shri Pradeep Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent – original plaintiff is not in a position to dispute the above. He is also not in a position to dispute that while dismissing the Appeal, the learned Appellate Court has not framed the points for determination as required under Order 41 Rule 31 of the CPC. He is also not in a position to dispute that the learned Appellate Court disposed of the Appeal in a most casual manner without discussing full the case on merits. He is also not in a position to dispute that the learned Appellate Court has not discussed and/or considered the most important issue with respect to jurisdiction of the Civil Court in detail. However, has submitted that the learned trial Court has not committed any error and/or illegality and therefore, it is requested not to remand the matter to the learned Appellate Court.
[4.0] Heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of respective parties at length and considered the impugned judgment and order passed by both the Courts below more particularly the judgment and order passed by the learned Appellate Court. Considering the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Appellate Court, it appears that the learned Appellate Court has disposed of the Appeal in a most casual manner and without discussing the case on merits in detail. Even the learned Appellate Court has not framed the points for determination while disposing of the Appeal, which is required as per the order under Order 41 Rule 31 of the CPC. The most important issue with respect to jurisdiction of the Civil Court has not been considered and dealt with by the learned Appellate Court in detail, which goes to the root of the matter. Under the circumstances, impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Appellate Court cannot be sustained and the matter deserves to be remanded to the learned Appellate Court to decide and dispose of the said Appeal in accordance with law and on merits and after framing the points for determination and considering all the issues in detail.
[5.0] In view of the above and for the reasons stated above and solely on the aforesaid ground and without expressing anything on merits in favour of either parties with respect to any of the issue, the impugned judgment and order passed dated 13.12.2001 passed by the learned Joint District Judge, Rajkot in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.42 of 1995 is hereby quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded to the learned Appellate Court to decide and dispose of the said Appeal afresh in accordance with law and on merits and after framing points for determination as required under Order 41 Rule 31 of the CPC and to consider all the issues in detail. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of one year from the date of receipt of the present order. However, it is observed that this Court has not expressed anything on merits of the case and the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Appellate Court is set aside solely on the aforesaid ground and nothing has been stated by this Court on merits in favour of either parties. It is ultimately for the learned Appellate Court to consider the Appeal in accordance with law and on merits.
[5.1] With this, present Second Appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent. No costs.
(M.R. Shah, J.) menon