Allahabad High Court
Ram Bhawan Yadav And Others vs Rakesh Yadav And Others on 16 June, 2022
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 7 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2150 of 2022 Petitioner :- Ram Bhawan Yadav And Others Respondent :- Rakesh Yadav And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Atul Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
Heard Sri Atul Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Rajmani Dubey, learned Standing Counsel for the opposite party nos. 16 and 17 and Sri Sunny Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Rajendra Kumar Gupta who states that he has filed a caveat on behalf of opposite party no.1.
By means of the instant writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, a challenge has been made to an order dated 08.06.2022 passed by the Commissioner, Ayodhya Division Ayodhya, rejecting an application dated 25.05.2022 filed by the appellant for reconstructing the record of the suit.
It was stated in the application that certain documents are not available on the record of the original suit and for a proper and complete adjudication of the matter, the record of the suit should be reconstructed by supplying the missing documents.
The respondent nos.1 and 2 have filed objections against the said application stating that the application has been filed with an intention to delay the disposal of the appeal, the original suit was decided finally on 30.06.2010 and as per law, record of a suit which has been finally decided cannot be reconstructed.
The aforesaid application has been decided by means of an order dated 08.06.2022 by one sentence order stating "for disposal of the appeal there appears to be no need for reconstruction of the file". No reason has been assigned as to why reconstruction of record is not required for final disposal of the appeal.
The law is well settled that appeal is a continuation of the original proceedings and the first appellate court is the final Court of fact. The first appeal has to be decided after taking into consideration the entire pleadings and evidence of the case and in case any of the pleadings and evidence has gone missing from the record, the same needs to be supplied so as to complete the record.
I find that the order dated 08.06.2022 passed by the Commissioner Ayodhya, Division Ayodhya in Appeal No. 33/20 of 2009-10 is not sustainable in law and accordingly the same is set aside.
The Commissioner, Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya, is directed to pass a fresh order on the appellants' application for reconstruction of the record after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties, in accordance with law, expeditiously, say within a period of two weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.
Till the final decision is taken on the application for reconstruction of the record in compliance of this order, the Commissioner Ayodhya Division Ayodhya shall not proceed to decide the appeal.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 16.6.2022 A.K.T.