Written By- Anay Singh
Introduction
An appeal is a legal remedy that grants individuals the right to seek justice by challenging unfair court decisions in a higher court under India’s Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) the process of filing these initial challenges known as First Appeals, is governed by Section 96 to 99A, 107 to 108, and Order 41. This provision ensures that parties have the opportunity to contest judgments they believe to be unjust.
The appeal is not a fundamental right nor a natural right, it is a creation of statute which was stated in the matter of Anant Mills vs State of Gujarat 1975 SC.
While the Code of Civil Procedure does not explicitly define the term ‘appeal’, Black’s Law Dictionary provides a comprehensive explanation. According to this authoritative source, an appeal is a formal request to a higher court to review an injustice or error made by a lower court. It involves transferring a case from a court of lower jurisdiction to one of higher jurisdiction for review and possible retrial.
Who can appeal:
The right to file a first appeal is carefully regulated and is available to specific categories of individuals. The primary parties who can file include:
- Direct parties, any party involved in the original suit, who has been negatively affected by the court’s order can file an appeal. Appeal under Section 146 can also be filed by the legal representatives if such party has passed away.
- Interest Transferees someone who has legally acquired the interest of an original party can file an appeal, provided their name has been officially recorded in the suit’s documentation. Their right to appeal is limited to matters concerning the specific interest.
- Auction Purchasers In cases where a sale is set aside due to fraud during execution, the auction purchaser has the right to appeal against such an order.
- Non-parties with special permission while generally only parties to the suit and appeal under Section 96, but there is an exception, a person who wasn’t part of original suit may be granted the right to appeal if they can prove that they are directly affected by or bound by the decree. However, this requires special permission from the appellate court.
The essential requirement for an Appeal
An appeal allows a higher court to re-examine a lower court’s decision, considering both questions of law and fact. The higher court has several powers at its disposal: it can confirm the original decision, reverse it, modify it, or return the case to the lower court with specific instructions for a fresh hearing. The essentials can be brought down to 3 elements:
- There must be a formal decree issued by a judicial or administrative authority.
- There must be an aggrieved party (who may or may not have been involved in the original proceedings).
- There must be an authorized reviewing body (such as a higher court) with the power to hear appeals.
Provisions Governing First Appeals Under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC)
Under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), First Appeals are governed by Section 96 and related provisions. A regular first appeal can be filed against a decree as defined under Section 2(2) of the CPC. A decree represents the formal expression of an adjudication by the code that conclusively determines the rights of parties concerning a controversy in the suit. Decrees may be either preliminary or final and include rejection of plaints and determinations under Section 144 (restitution). However, they exclude certain educations, such as orders that are applicable separately and dismissals for default.
A suit typically concludes with the pronouncement of a final judgment under Order XX Rule 1. As per Section 2(9), a judgment refers to the statement by judge on the grounds of a degree or order. Once the judgment is delivered, the decree is drawn up in compliance with Order XX Rules 6 and 7. The degree must align with the judgment, bear the date of the judgment, and include details such as the claim, relief granted, and costs rewarded. Although the judgment is dated the day it is pronounced, the preparation of the decree may take up to 15 days under Order XX Rule 6-A.
Legal Provisions that Deal with First Appeal in Code of Civil Procedure, 1908:
Section 96 provides for an appeal from original decrees unless expressly barred. Subsection (1) allows appeals against decrees passed by a court exercising original jurisdiction, while subsection (2) permits appeals against ex-parte decrees. Subsection (3) prohibits appeals against consent decrees, and subsection (4) restricts appeals in matters of small cause suits when the subject matter does not exceed 10,000 rupees, except on question of law. These provisions establish the framework of filing regular first appeals.
Section 97: Limitation on Appeals from Final Decrees
Where a party aggrieved by a preliminary decree refrains from appealing against such decree post the code’s commencement, they shall be precluded from challenging its correctness in any subsequent appeal preferred from the final degree. This provision ensures finality of preliminary decrease unless challenged within the prescribed.
Section 98: Appellate Decision-Making Protocol
In cases where multiple judges here and appeal, the decision shall be governed by majority opinion. In the absence of a majority consensus for varying or reversing the decree under appeal, the original decree shall stand confirmed. In instances of an equally divided bench disagreeing on the points of law, such points may be referred to other judges of the court, with the ultimate decision being determined by the majority opinion of all judges involved in the appellate hearing. This provision operates without prejudice to any High Court’s letters patent provisions.
Section 99: Preservation of Substantive Justice
The section mandates that no decree shall be reversed, substantially varied, or remanded in appeal merely due to procedural irregularities such as misjoinder or non-joinder of parties, or other procedural defects not affecting the case’s merits or the court’s jurisdiction.
Section 99A: Protection of Orders Under Section 47
This provision, while preserving Section 99’s general application, specifically addresses orders under Section 47. Such orders shall not be reversed or substantially varied due to procedural irregularities unless such defects have materially prejudiced the case’s outcome.
Maintainability of Appeals:
Appeals are maintainable against specific adjudications. These include appeals against preliminary and final decree, rejection of plaints under Order VII Rule 11, determinations under Section 144 (restitution), and original decrees that pass ex-parte.
Whereas, certain orders passed before the final decision in a suit are also applicable as miscellaneous appeals under Section 104 read with Order XLIII Rule 1 of CPC. These include orders related to compensatory costs for false or vexatious claims under Section 35-A, refusals of leave to institute suits under Sections 91 and 92, and orders for compensation under Section 95. Appeals under this category are referred to as Miscellaneous Appeals in District Courts and First Appeals from Orders (FAFO) in the High Court.
On the other hand, first appeals are not maintainable against dismissals of suits for default, determinations under Section 47 (post-1976 amendment), consent decrees, or decrees in small cause suits below 10,000. Rupees in value, except questions of law. For cases under the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act, appeals under Section 96 are now available, but revisions on point of law can be sought under Section 25 of the Act.
The Procedure for Filing Appeals Against Original Decrees:
Filling Requirements (Rule 1):
Under the procedural requirements established under Order XLI, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, an appeal shall be preferred in the form of a duly executed memorandum, bearing the signature of either the appellant or their authorized legal representative, and such memorandum shall be presented before the Court of competent jurisdiction or its duly appointed officer. The said memorandum shall be mandatory accompanied by a certified copy of the impugned judgment. Provided, however, that in instances where multiple suits have been tried together, resulting in a common judgment, and where there are two or more appeals are filed against any decree covered by that judgment, whether by the same appellant or different appellants, the Appellate Court may, at its discretion, dispense with the requirement of filing multiple copies of the judgment, and may accept a single copy thereof.
Content Requirements of the Memorandum:
The memorandum of appeal shall set forth the grounds of objection to the impugned decree clearly and concisely, with each objection delineated under distinct headings. Such grounds of objection shall be numbered consecutively and presented without any argumentative discourse or narrative exposition. Furthermore, in cases where the appeal pertains to a monetary decree, it is incumbent upon the appellant to either deposit the amount in dispute or furnish such security as deemed appropriate by the Appellate Court within such timeframe as may be prescribed by the said code. The requirements above are mandatory and constitute essential prerequisites for the maintainability of the appeal.
Grounds for Appeal (Rule 2):
The appellant is restricted to presenting arguments solely on the grounds expressly delineated in their memorandum of appeal, as per Rule 2 of Order XLI. However, should the appellant wish to introduce additional grounds of objection beyond those initially specified, they must obtain explicit leave of the court. Notwithstanding these limitations on the appellant, the appellate court retains the discretion to consider and base its decisions on grounds not originally outlined in the memorandum of appeal, subject to the essential proviso that any party who may be adversely affected by such additional grounds must be afforded sufficient and reasonable opportunity to contest the case on those new grounds. This provision ensures both procedural flexibility for the court and principles of natural justice for all parties involved.
The Memorandum Amendments (Rule 3):
If a memorandum of appeal is not drawn up in accordance with the prescribed manner, the court may exercise its discretion in three ways: it may reject the memorandum while recording reasons for such rejection, return it to the appellant for amendment within a court-specified timeframe, or permit immediate amendment thereof. Furthermore, any amendments made to the memorandum must be duly authenticated through signature or initial by either the presiding judge or an officer authorized in this behalf.
Handling Delayed Appeals (Rule 3A):
When an appeal is filed beyond the prescribed limitation, it must be accompanied by an affidavit setting forth sufficient cause for the delay. Prior to proceeding with such appeal, the court shall issue notice for the respondent. Furthermore, no stay of execution of the decree shall be granted until the court, after hearing Rule 11 determines to entertain the appeal.
Multiple Parties (Rule 4):
When a decree affects multiple plaintiffs or defendants on common grounds, any single party may appeal on behalf of all affected parties.
Judicial Interpretation on First Appeal
The Supreme Court of India has played a pivotal role in interpreting the provision related to first of beings, particularly under section 96 and order XLI. The judicial interpretation of first appeals under the CPC has evolved through various landmark judgments by the Supreme Court of India. These interpretations underscore the significance of detailed reasoning and comprehensive review in ensuring justice within civilization by affirming the rights of parties to challenge trial core decisions on both factual and legal grounds. The Supreme Court has reinforced the essential role of first appeals in upholding fairness and accountability in judicial proceedings.
- Santosh Hazari v. Purushottam Tiwari (2001)
In this case, the Supreme Court emphasized the responsibilities of the first appellate court. It reiterated that the appellate court must address all issues raised during the trial and provide recent findings. The court stated that the judgment in a first appeal must engage with both questions of law and fact, comprehensively, ensuring that no aspect of the case is overlooked.
- H.K.N. Swami v. Irshad Basith (2005)
The Supreme Court highlighted that the first appeal must be decided based on both facts and law. It criticized a High Court’s failure to record findings on either front, underscoring that the first appellate court must consider all evidence presented and make determinations accordingly. The court set aside the included judgment due to this oversight, reinforcing the principle that first appellate courts must fulfill their obligation to engage with all relevant issues.
- Vinod Kumar v. Gangadhar (2015)
This case reiterated earlier principles regarding first appeals, affirming that they provide a valuable right to parties to rehear their cases on questions of facts and law. The court clarified that, unless restricted by law, an entire case is open for review during a first appeal. It also emphasized that appellate codes must articulate their reasoning clearly when reversing or affirming trial course decisions.
- Shasidhar v. Ashwani Uma Mathad (2020)
In this case, the Supreme Court stressed that it is imperative for a High Court acting as a first appellate court to adhere to its duties under section 96 and order XLI rule 31. The failure to do so can lead to significant prejudice against parties involved in litigation. The court noted that a thorough examination of all issues and evidence is essential for just outcomes in appeals.
- State Bank of India & Anr. V. Emmsons International Ltd. (2011)
The case further cemented the importance of detailed judicial reasoning in first appeals. The Supreme Court observed that when an appellate court fails to consider critical issues of evidence presented at trial, it undermines the integrity of judicial proceedings. The court remanded the case for fresh disposal, reiterating that appellate courts must engage fully with all aspects of cases before them.
Conclusion
The framework for first appeals under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) serves as a cornerstone of the appellate judicial system, ensuring that parties have an opportunity to seek redressal against potentially unjust decisions. Through a meticulous interplay of substantive and procedural laws, including Sections 96 to 99A and Order XLI, the CPC provides a robust mechanism for reviewing decisions, balancing the rights of aggrieved parties with judicial efficiency.
First appeals safeguard the principles of fairness by allowing a comprehensive review of both facts and legal questions, while also delineating clear boundaries for maintainability. This structured approach upholds judicial accountability, ensuring that errors or oversights in trial courts can be addressed adequately in appellate forums. With judicial interpretations reinforcing the importance of reasoned and detailed decisions in appeals, the system underlines the commitment to delivering justice and maintaining public confidence in the judiciary.
