Anna Sagar, Circular Road, Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer Raj. vs The Municipal Council, Ajmer Now Being Municipal

by Mr. Adhiraj Modi, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ishan Kumawat, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS Judgment / Order 19/09/2025 vihykFkhZ&okfn;k dh vksj ls ;g f}rh; vihy vUrxZr /kkjk 100 lh-ih-lh- fo}ku vij ftyk U;k;k/kh'k la[;k&2] vtesj }kjk nhokuh fu;fer vihy la[;k 163@2008 esa ikfjr fu.kZ; fnukad 03-09-2015 ls O;fFkr gksdj is'k dh gS ftlds ek/;e ls vihykFkhZ&okfn;k dh vihy [kkfjt djrs gq, fo}ku vfrfjDr flfoy U;k;k/kh'k ¼d0[k0½] la[;k&4] vtesj }kjk nhokuh okn la[;k 182@2002 esa ikfjr fu.kZ;@fMØh fnukad 22-10-2008 dh iqf"V dh x;h] ftlds ek/;e ls vihykFkhZ&okfn;k dk okn ckcr~ LFkk;h fu"ks/kkKk [kkfjt fd;k x;kA fo}ku vf/koDrk vihykFkhZ rFkk izR;FkhZ dh cgl lquhA pwafd ;g f}rh; flfoy vihy gS] vr% ,slh fLFkfr esa tc rd fof/k dk lkjoku iz'u varoZfyr ugha gks] rc rd lquokbZ gsrq xzg.k ugha dh tk ldrh gS rFkk fopkj.k o vihyh; U;k;ky; }kjk tks fu"d"kZ fn;k x;k gS] mlesa lkekU; :i ls gLr{ksi fd;k tkuk mfpr ugha gSA bl laca/k esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk Boodireddy Chandraiah and Ors. Versus Arigda [2025:RJ-JP:38532] (2 of 5) [CSA-4/2016] Laxmi and Anr. AIR 2008 SC 380 ds iSjk la[;k 13 esa fuEufyf[kr fl)kar izfrikfnr fd;k x;k gS %& "13. The general rule is that High Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of the Courts below. But it is not an absolute rule. Some of the well recognized exceptions are where (i) the courts below have ignored material evidence or acted on no evidence; (ii) the courts have drawn wrong inferences from proved facts by applying the law erroneously; or (iii) the courts have wrongly cast the burden of proof. When we refer to 'decision based on no evidence', it not only refers to cases where there is a total dearth of evidence, but also refers to any case, where the evidence, taken as a whole, is not reasonably capable of supporting the finding." ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk vU; U;kf;d fu.kZ; Gurnam Singh vs. Lehna Singh 2019 (7) SCC 641 esa Hkh mijksDr er O;Dr djrs gq, ;g vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gS fd f}rh; vihy esa lk{; dk iqu% fo'ys"k.k o foospu vuqKs; ugha gS] mijksDr fu.kZ; dk lqlaxr Hkkx fuEukuqlkj gS%& "Before parting with the present judgment, we remind the High Courts that the jurisdiction of the High Court, in an appeal under Section 100 CPC, is strictly confined to the case involving substantial question of law and while deciding the second appeal under Section 100 CPC, it is not permissible for the High Court to reappreciate the evidence on record and interfere with the findings recorded by the courts below and/or the first appellate court and if the first appellate court has exercised its discretion in a judicial manner, its decision cannot be recorded as suffering from an error either of law or of procedure requiring interference in second appeal. We have noticed and even as repeatedly observed by this Court and even in Narayanan Rajendran v. Lekshmy Sarojini [Narayanan Rajendran v. Lekshmy Sarojini, (2009) 5 SCC 264 : (2009) 2 SCC (Civ) 500] , despite the catena of decisions of this Court and even the [2025:RJ-JP:38532] (3 of 5) [CSA-4/2016] mandate under Section 100 CPC, the High Courts under Section 100 CPC are disturbing the concurrent findings of facts and/or even the findings recorded by the first appellate court, either without formulating the substantial question of law or on framing erroneous substantial question of law." fof/k dk lkjoku iz'u D;k gksxk] bl laca/k esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk Santosh Hazari Versus Purushottam Tiwari (Dead) by L.Rs AIR 2001 SC 965 ds iSjk la[;k&12 esa fuEufyf[kr fl)kar izfrikfnr fd;k x;k gS%& "12. The phrase 'substantial question of law', as occurring in the amended Section 100 is not defined in the Code. The word substantial, as qualifying 'question of law', means — of having substance, essential, real, of sound worth, important or considerable. It is to be understood as something in contradistinction with — technical, of no substance or consequence, or academic merely. However, it is clear that the legislature has chosen not to qualify the scope of 'substantial question of law' by suffixing the words “of general importance” as has been done in many other provisions such as Section 109 of the Code or Article 133(1)(a) of the Constitution. The substantial question of law on which a second appeal shall be heard need not necessarily be a substantial question of law of general importance. In Guran Ditta v. T. Ram Ditta [AIR 1928 PC 172 : 55 IA 235] , the phrase 'substantial question of law' as it was employed in the last clause of the then existing Section 110 CPC (since omitted by the Amendment Act, 1973) came up for consideration and their Lordships held that it did not mean a substantial question of general importance but a substantial question of law which was involved in the case as between the parties......" fo}ku vf/koDrk vihykFkhZ&okfn;k dk ;g rdZ gS fd okfn;k ds ijhf{kr ugha gksus ek= ds vk/kkj ij fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk okfn;k dk okn [2025:RJ-JP:38532] (4 of 5) [CSA-4/2016] [kkfjt fd;k gS] tcfd mldk iq= ih-MCyw&1 lHkh rF;ksa ls ifjfpr Fkk vkSj og fopkj.k U;k;ky; esa ijhf{kr gqvk] mlds }kjk okn esa of.kZr vfHkdFkuksa dh iqf"V dh xbZ gS] ysfdu mlds ckotwn rF;ksa o fof/k ds foijhr tkdj fopkj.k rFkk vihyh; U;k;ky; }kjk okfn;k dk okn [kkfjt fd;k gSA blds foijhr fo}ku vf/koDrk izR;FkhZ }kjk ;g rdZ fn;k x;k gS fd Lo;a okfn;k }kjk vius Hkw[k.M ds if'pe esa fu/kkZfjr 10 QhV dk lsV&cSd ugha NksM+k gS] lq[kkf/kdkj dk ekeyk nksuksa gh U;k;ky;ksa }kjk izekf.kr ugha ekuk gS] leorhZ fu"d"kZ gS ftls f}rh; vihy esa gLr{ksi fd;k tkuk mfpr ugha gSA fof/k dk dksbZ lkjoku iz'u bl f}rh; vihy esa vUrxZzLr ugha gS] bl izdkj vihy [kkfjt fd;s tkus dk fuosnu fd;kA lqlaxr rF; ;g gS fd okfn;k }kjk fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k okn izLrqr dj vfHkdfFkr fd;k fd Hkw[k.M la[;k 232 mls uxj fodkl U;kl }kjk vkoafVr fd;k x;k Fkk tks mlds LokfeRo dk gS ftlds if'pe esa Hkw[k.M la[;k 231 ds :i esa uxj fodkl U;kl dh Hkwfe gSA okfn;k us vius Hkw[k.M ds if'pe esa tkyh] jks'kunku vkfn fudky j[ks gSa] ysfdu vc izR;FkhZ@izfroknh] okfn;k ds Hkw[k.M ds if'pe esa yxrs gh fuekZ.k dk;Z djus ij vkeknk gS ftlls mlds lq[kkf/kdkj dk guu gksxkA tcfd izfroknh i{k }kjk vius tcko nkos esa dFku fd;k fd okfn;k dks vius Hkw[k.M ds if'pe esa 10 QhV dk lsV&cSd NksMdj fuekZ.k dk;Z djuk Fkk] fu/kkZfjr vof/k iw.kZ ugha gksus ls dksbZ lq[kkf/kdkj gkfly ugha gqvk gS] Lo;a okfn;k loksZRre lk{kh Fkh tks ijhf{kr ugha gqbZ gSA fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk nksuksa i{kksa dh lk{; vkfn dk fo'ys"k.k djrs gq, okfn;k ds Hkw[k.M ds if'pe esa izfroknh ds izLrkfor fuekZ.k dks fof/k&lEer gksuk crkrs gq, okfn;k dk okn [kkfjt fd;k gS] ftldh iqf"V fo}ku vihyh; U;k;ky; }kjk dh x;h gSA iwoksZDr U;kf;d n`"Vkarksa esa izfrikfnr O;oLFkk o f}rh; vihy ds Ldksi vkfn ds lanHkZ esa vfHkys[k ij miyC/k lkexzh o lk{; dk /;kuiwoZd voyksdu djus ls ;g Li"V gksrk gS fd nksuksa fo}ku v/khuLFk U;k;ky;ksa }kjk vfHkys[k ij miyC/k rF;ksa] ifjfLFkfr;ksa ,oa Lohd`fr dh [2025:RJ-JP:38532] (5 of 5) [CSA-4/2016] vuns[kh dh gks ;k tks rF; vfHkys[k ij miyC/k ugha gS] ml ij fopkj fd;k gks ;k lkfcr rF;ksa ds laca/k esa dksbZ xyr bUÝsal gks] ,slk n`f"Vxr ugha gksrk gS] fo}ku fopkj.k rFkk vihyh; U;k;ky; }kjk miyC/k lk{; o lkexzh dk lgh :i ls fo'ys"k.k o foospu fd;k gS rFkk fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr fu.kZ; dh iqf"V fo}ku vihyh; U;k;ky; }kjk dh x;h gS] bl izdkj leorhZ rF;kRed fu"d"kZ jgk gaS] blfy, mijksDr fu.kZ;ksa esa gLr{ksi fd, tkus ds dksbZ fof/klEer vk/kkj ugha gSA vr% nksuksa gh v/khuLFk U;k;ky;ksa }kjk mDr lEcU/k esa vfHkfyf[kr leorhZ rF;kRed fu"d"kksZa esa fdlh izdkj dh dksbZ =qfV vFkok izfrdwyrk ugha gksus ls o bl f}rh; vihy esa fof/k dk dksbZ lkjHkwr iz'u ugha gksus ls ;g f}rh; vihy xzg.kkFkZ Lrj ij gh fujLr fd;s tkus ;ksX; gS] tks ,rn~}kjk fujLr dh tkrh gS] LFkxu vkosnu Hkh mDrkuqlkj vLohdkj ekuk tkrk gSA Mittal /22 (UMA SHANKER VYAS),J