Vijender Singh v. Rajinder Pal

: Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate. For the respondent : Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Mr. H.S. Rangra, Advocate. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- “It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this petition may kindly be allowed and the impugned orders passed by Ld. Civil Judge Jhandutta, District Bilaspur, H.P.; passed in Civil Misc. Application No. 646-6 of 2021 in a Civil suit titled as Vijender Singh versus Rajinder Pal" and the same confirmed by the Ld. Additional District Judge Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, HP in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 45 of 2022 titled as "Vijender Singh versus Rajinder Pal" i.e. Annexures-P1 and P7 may kindly be quashed and set aside in the interest of justice after calling for the records of the case from the ld. Courts below in the interest of justice.” 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2

2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the present petitioner has filed a suit against the respondent herein alongwith an application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for interim therein. Learned Trial Court dismissed the said application. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Order 43, Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure. Arguments in the appeal were heard on 09.07.2025.

3. After the arguments were heard, the present petitioner filed an application filed under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure to place on record certain documents on 09.07.2025 itself. In terms of the impugned order dated 02.08.2025, the appeal filed by the petitioner herein under Order 43, Rule 1(r) CPC was dismissed.

4. The grievance of the petitioner inter alia is that the appeal was dismissed by the learned Appellate Court without considering the application under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Today, learned Counsel for the parties made available the order passed on the said application by the learned Appellate Court for the perusal of the Court. This Order is dated

02.08.2025 and the same reads as under:- 3 “Since, the present application was filed after hearing the arguments and the main appeal has been dismissed, hence, no further order is required to be passed. The same is disposed of accordingly. The file, after due completion be tagged with main case file.”

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that as there was an application on record filed under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the same was filed before the pronouncement of the judgment, may be after the arguments were heard in the appeal, learned Appellate Court was bound to have decided the same on merit and it could not have been disposed of in the manner as has been done in the present case.

6. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondent has submitted that as the application was filed after the arguments were heard in the appeal, as is also evident from the averments made in the application, the same was rightly dismissed in terms of the order passed thereupon on 02.08.2025.

7. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and also carefully gone through the orders passed by the learned Appellate Court including the order passed by learned Appellate Court on application filed under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 4

8. In terms of the law settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, an application filed under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure has to be taken for consideration by the learned Appellate Court at the stage of the final hearing of the appeal when the matter is being decided finally on merit.

9. In the present case, as the petitioner had filed an application under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, may be after the arguments were heard in the appeal but before the pronouncement of the judgment, it was incumbent upon the learned Appellate Court to have listed the application and sought response thereto from the respondents and thereafter decided the same alongwith the main appeal. This procedure was not followed by the learned Appellate Court. In fact, what the learned Appellate Court has done is that it has, on one hand, independently decided the appeal vide judgment dated 02.08.2025 and thereafter dismissed the application by holding that as the application was filed after arguments were heard in the main appeal, which stood dismissed, therefore, no further order is required to be passed on the same.

10. While passing this order, learned Appellate Court has not appreciated that in law, the petitioner was not precluded from moving an application under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil 5 Procedure after the arguments were addressed by the parties in the appeal. This extremely important aspect of the matter has been lost sight of by the learned Appellate Court. As per this Court, application could have been filed by any of the parties after the final arguments were heard by the Appellate Court before pronouncement of the judgment and if any such application was filed by any of the parties, it was duty of the learned Appellate Court to decide the same in accordance with law.

11. In the absence of said procedure having been followed by learned Appellate Court, the judgment passed by the learned Court in appeal as well as the order passed in the application filed under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, are not sustainable in the eyes of law. Learned Appellate Court should have taken up the application alongwith the appeal and passed some order thereupon either way, but on merit. However, the application could not have been dismissed by assigning the reasons as have been assigned. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Judgment dated

02.08.2025 passed by learned Appellate Court in the appeal is set aside and the order passed by learned Appellate Court of even date on the application filed under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure is also set aside. 6

12. Matter is remanded back to the learned Appellate Court by reviving the appeal, with the direction that after seeking the response to the application filed under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure from the respondent, the learned Appellate Court shall decide the appeal afresh alongwith application filed under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It is clarified that this Court has not made any observation with regard to the merit of the application that has been filed under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the same shall be dealt with by the learned Appellate Court on its own merit alongwith the appeal.

13. Parties through Counsel are directed to appear before learned Appellate Court on 16.01.2026. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge January 08, 2026 (narender)