Law: Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Section: 96, 107, 115

Summary

The High Court disposed of a civil revision filed under Section 115 CPC against an interlocutory order whereby the learned Additional District Judge dismissed an application seeking amendment and reframing of issues during the pendency of a first appeal arising out of a suit for specific performance.

The petitioner sought amendment of issues framed by the Trial Court after dismissal of the suit, contending that the issues were wrongly worded and contrary to the pleadings, which allegedly resulted in dismissal of the suit. The High Court held that although an appellate court possesses the power to amend or reframe issues as an appeal is a continuation of the suit, such power is ordinarily to be exercised at the time of final disposal of the appeal, and not through interlocutory proceedings unless grave prejudice or failure of justice is demonstrated.

It was further held that interlocutory discretionary orders passed by an appellate court during pendency of an appeal are not amenable to revisional jurisdiction, particularly where the party has an adequate remedy at the stage of final decision. The appellate court retains jurisdiction under Order XLI Rules 23–25 CPC to reframe issues, remand the case, or finally decide the appeal after resettling issues, notwithstanding dismissal of an earlier application.