Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 2255 (RAJ)

State of Rajasthan v. Shri Krishan Lal

2008-09-25

ASHOK PARIHAR

body2008
JUDGMENT 1. - This Court at the time of hearing of the appeal passed the following order on 04/08/2008 : "Chapter-13 of the Rajasthan High Court Rules specifically provides for provisions and detailed procedure in regard to preparation of paper-book in civil first appeals. However, it has been noticed that the provisions of above Chapter so far are not been followed at all, moreso, when there is no provision under Chapter-13 for exemption of preparation of paper-book in the civil first appeals except where the valuation , less than Rs. 20,000/-. Counsel for the appellant(s) may submit necessarily paper-book within 30 days. Put up for hearing after 30 days. The Deputy Registrar (Judicial) is also directed to issue necessary notice as per provisions of Chapter-13 to all the parties concerned for preparation of paper-book in civil first appeals." 2. The general notice had duly been issued by the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) accordingly. Similar orders have also been passed in large number of Regular Civil First Appeals pending hearing. 3. When the matter again came up for hearing today, as per office report, paper book, as ordered above, has not been submitted by the appellant so far. However, it was pointed out by some of the counsels that in the main seat of this Court at Jodhpur, the learned Single Judge has held otherwise. A copy of the order passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 617/2005, Bhagwan Singh v. Makkhan Singh dated 02/09/2008 has also been submitted for perusal of this Court. It has been held that irrespective of valuation so long a first appeal to be heard by a Judge sitting alone, preparation of paper book is not necessary. 4. This Court, while holding the preparation of paper book as not necessary, has directed the office that all such appeals shall be dealt with as a preparation of paper books is not necessary except those in which there is any specific order of the Court for preparation of the paper book or compilation of papers in any other form. 5. It may be relevant to mention here that while passing the order dated 02/09/2008 the learned Single Judge in the case of Bhagwan Singh (supra) while referring to earlier judgment of this Court in the case of Munshi Ram v. Prakash Chand and another, 1997(1) RLW Raj. 5. It may be relevant to mention here that while passing the order dated 02/09/2008 the learned Single Judge in the case of Bhagwan Singh (supra) while referring to earlier judgment of this Court in the case of Munshi Ram v. Prakash Chand and another, 1997(1) RLW Raj. 183 , has heavily relied upon earlier judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Mansukhram Chela of Bhikaram Maharaj v. Hemaram Chela of Shri Jasuram, 1963 RLW 615 . 6. This Court in the case of Munshi Ram (supra), while referring to detailed provisions of Chapter-13 of the Rajasthan High Court Rules, 1952, held that unless otherwise ordered, no paper book shall be required to be prepared by the office of the Registry in the cases of such first appeals where valuation is below Rs. 20,000/- but in other cases of first appeals, where valuation of first appeal is either Rs. 20,000/- or more, the paper books are to be prepared under the Rules of the Court without any exemption. Even in those cases where valuation of a first appeal is below As. 20,000/- as the court directs to prepare the paper book in such cases only after orders of the Court, the paper books would be prepared and not otherwise. The Court further observed that in view of the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mansukhram Chela of Bhikaram Maharaj (supra) in rarest of rare cases if the Court is satisfied after looking into the facts and circumstances of the particular case, the preparation of the paper book can be dispensed with by speaking order after hearing both the parties. Referring to the penal consequences of dismissals of SB First Appeals as, envisaged under Rule 184 of the High Court Rules, the Court directed the Registry to follow the detailed Rules as prescribed under Chapter-13 of the Rules of the Court regarding preparation of the paper book in SB First Appeals in which valuation is either Rs. 20,000/- or more than Rs. 20,000/-. 20,000/- or more than Rs. 20,000/-. While referring to order of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mansukhram Chela of Bhikaram Maharaj (supra) this Court in Munshi Ram (supra) observed that ratio of the case of Mansukhram Chela of Bhikaram Maharaj would be applicable only in those cases when the plaintiff filed a suit as a pauper and has also filed a first appeal as a pauper and not otherwise. 7. As a matter of fact, in case of Mansukh Ram (supra) the Division Bench had also passed the orders in regard to dispensing with preparation of paper book in the facts of that particular case only. In case of Mansukh Ram (supra) the suit was filed by plaintiff-appellant as a pauper and even the regular first appeal had been filed as a pauper. The appeal been dismissed for want of paper book, on a misc. Application for restoration of appeal orders were passed by the Division Bench as per facts of that case only. The relevant observations made by the Division Bench in the case of Mansukhram Chela of Bhikaram Maharaj (supra) are reproduced here as under : "In case the petitioners' case is dismissed for the reason that he cannot afford to pay for the preparation of the paper book, it would mean that justice is to be denied to him for no other reason except petitioner's poverty. Both rich and poor stand at par before this Court and it is very necessary that the poor man should not be deprived of justice because of their poverty. Having regard to the condition of poverty of the petitioner, it is clear that he cannot afford to pay expenses for the preparation of the paper book in this case. If the rules are strictly enforced in this case, the result would be denying justice to the petitioner. The rules of procedure should not be so construed as to go to the length of depriving a person of his right to get justice at the hands of this Court. We, therefore, feel that this is a special case in which this Court should interpret the rules liberally. Before the formation of the State of Rajasthan the High Court which functioned at Jodhpur did not require paper books in such cases and the Court studied the case with the help of the original reports. We, therefore, feel that this is a special case in which this Court should interpret the rules liberally. Before the formation of the State of Rajasthan the High Court which functioned at Jodhpur did not require paper books in such cases and the Court studied the case with the help of the original reports. The same procedure may be adhered to in this case." 8. In the case of Bhagwan Singh (supra), with due regards the learned Single Judge appears to have been swayed by the anxiety of pendency of large number of first appeals which could not be heard for want of preparation of the paper book. However, while expeditious disposal of appeals in the larger interests of the litigants, the mandatory statutory provisions of the rules cannot be given a go-bye, more so, in case of non-compliance of provisions of Chapter-13 of the Rules, a legal right is created in favour of one of the parties. The learned Single Judge has pointed out the availability of the electronic prints in evidence available in prints and type writing. However, as has been noticed, even till date, all the courts below have not been provided with such latest technologies. In most of the civil first appeals, the documents and the statement of the witnesses and at times, even the applications and pleadings of the parties are handwritten which most of the times are not properly legible. This Court in Civil First Appeals does not have extraordinary jurisdiction to evolve its own procedure. It may be noticed that under Rule 223 also in case of any First Appeal, if the Chief Justice is satisfied that it may be disposed of on a question of law alone, he 5 may order that a typewritten paper book with specific papers be prepared. There is no other provision for applying for dispensing with preparation of paper book. 9. There is no other provision for applying for dispensing with preparation of paper book. 9. The directions issued by this Court in the case of Mansukh Ram (supra) as also Bhagwan Singh (supra) have created a lot of confusion in the office of the Registry as also among the litigants involved in the Civil First Appeals and the matter requires urgent consideration and decision of a Larger Bench on the point "Whether in civil first appeal preparation of paper book is necessary or not as per provisions of Chapter-13 of the High Court Rules." Hon'ble the Chief Justice is, therefore, requested to constitute a Larger Bench if thinks proper for deciding the above issue as expeditiously as possible so that the entire confusion may be cleared and the appeals may be listed for hearing before appropriate Bench.Matter Ordered For Orders of Chief Justice For Reference To Larger Bench. *******