Frequently Asked Questions
by
Hon'ble Tmt Justice R.Banumathi, Judge, High Court Madras.

Question No: 1

Whether appellate Court is entitled to take into consideration subsequent events?

Answer:

An appellate court is entitled to take into consideration subsequent events taking place during pendency of appeal and a court in an appropriate case permits amendment of a plaint or written statement as the case may be; but such amendment is permitted in order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and not where such amendment causes prejudice to the plaintiff’s vested right rendering him without remedy.   – (2001) 8 SCC 24; AIR 2001 SC 2472.

Question No: 2

Whether appellate Court can take into account legislative changes subsequent to the litigation?

Answer:

An appellate Court can grant relief according to the new law which has come into force in the meantime – AIR 1985 SC 111.

Question No: 3

Plaintiff who was granted the alternate relief of refund of advance money but whose prayer for specific performance was denied, whether can file an appeal?

Answer:

The plaintiff who was granted the alternate relief of refund of advance money but whose prayer for specific performance was denied,  is an aggrieved person and he can file an appeal – AIR 1990 Madras 361 (FB).

Question No: 4

Whether plaintiff can be allowed to set up a new plea or point during appeal?

Answer:

1. Where the plea of novation of a contract is not taken in the trial court and no evidence was let in, the plea cannot be allowed to be raised in the appeal – AIR 1995 Madras 318 (DB).

1. In a suit to set aside a sale deed plea of fraudulent representation and exercise of undue influence was averred in the plaint but no issue was raised and no evidence was let in trial – Held appellate court could not decree suit on those grounds –       AIR 1971 SC 1028.

Question No: 5

Whether appellate Court can interfere with the discretion of the trial Court and reverse the findings?

Answer:

Appellate Court is always reluctant to interfere with the discretion of the trial court.   Where Judgment of trial Court is perverse, on sufficient grounds appellate court can interfere with the discretion of the trial court – air 1948 pc 53 & 1994 (2) Law Weekly 145.