much and from whom?
3. What Order?
9. This court reframed issues on 16.08.2017 as follows:
REFRAMED ISSUES IN M.V.C.1718/2016 ... 1719/2016
4. What Order?
REFRAMED ISSUES IN M.V.C.1719/2016
1. Whether Petitioner prove that, the accident occurred
due to rash
issue Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6 were confirmed.
3. After remand, the trial court instead of deciding the two issues reframed by the appellate ... caused to the petitioner by framing fresh issues by the trial court inasmuch as the two issues reframed by the first appellate court were included
lead any fresh evidence.
As such, Ld. Trial court reframed issues. However, it was
incumbent upon Ld. Trial court to record statements of both ... issues has been mentioned as 28.01.2014, when issues were
originally framed by the trial Court on that very day, whereas, the new
issues were reframed
reframing of the issues, which came to be
-5-
RSA No. 200191 of 2019
allowed and issues were reframed by the Trial Court ... show the issues framed earlier and
the issues proposed by the plaintiffs are reproduced and
on perusal of the impugned judgment, the reframed
issues
mentioned, hence Issue No.1 is deleted
and said issue reframed as follows.
REFRAMED ISSUE NO.1 IN M.V.C.No.6850/2016
Whether ... above said issues are as under:
Issues No.1 in
M.V.C.No.6849/2016 and
Reframed Issue
were reframed on separate sheet of paper
in view of transposing the defendants 3 to 6 as
plaintiffs 2 to 5 (that reframed issues ... available in file and accordingly issues were reframed
afresh).
10. In view of reframing of issues, both the
Advocates submit that they have no further
this court
deleted issue No.2 and reframed issue No.2 as follows:
REFRAMED ISSUE NO.2
Whether the Petitioners prove that, the Car bearing ... above said issues are as under:
Issue No.1 : Partly in the Affirmative
Issue No.2 : Deleted
Reframed Issue No.2 : In the Affirmative
Issue
raised this contention.
Accordingly, this Court finds it appropriate to reframe Issue No. 2
as follows:
"Whether Defendant No. 1 and Defendant ... suit property to the Plaintiff? ... OPD3."
63. For the said reframing of issue, reliance is placed on Order
XIV Rule 5 which provides
issues. When issues were framed on 24.8.2002, burden of proof
with regard to issue No.1 was on the plaintiffs. However, while
reframing issue ... parties to lead evidence qua
the said issues. However, in case, issues are merely reframed and
parties have already led their evidence in that regard
year, 2002, the issues were
framed on 13.01.2016 and plaintiff evidence was completed on 03.06.2016.
He states that the issues were reframed by the Trial ... does not record any objection
of defendant no.1 to the issues reframed on the said date. It does not appear
from the said order
