ANAND PRAKASH SHARMA Vs. JASHWANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these Second Appeals arise out of a common judgment, but separate decrees passed in two connected Civil Appeals, which, in turn, have arisen from suits inter partes relating to the same subject matter that are in the nature of cross-suits. This judgment will dispose of both the appeals.

(2.) Second Appeal No. 733 of 2012 has been preferred by the plaintiff of Original Suit No. 273 of 1998 against the defendants of the said suit, whereas Second Appeal No. 734 of 2012 has been preferred also by the same man, Anand Prakash Sharma, but in his capacity as defendant no.1 to Original Suit No. 1162 of 1998, instituted by the first defendant to Original Suit No. 273 of 1998. Effectively, both the suits were contested between Anand Prakash Sharma and Jaswant Singh. While Anand Prakash Sharma's suit being O.S. No. 273 of 1998 was dismissed, Jaswant Singh's suit being O.S. No. 1162 of 1998 was decreed by the Trial Court, also by a common judgment, but separate decrees. The suits were consolidated and tried together, with O.S. No. 273 of 1998 as the leading case. Most of the evidence of parties was recorded in the leading suit. Civil Appeal No. 9 of 2005 was preferred by Anand Prakash Sharma against the judgment and decree dtd. 17/3/2005 passed in O.S. No. 273 of 1998, whereas the other appeal being Civil Appeal No. 10 of 2005, was also preferred by Anand Prakash Sharma, but from the judgment and decree dtd. 17/3/2005 passed in O.S. No. 1162 of 1998. Both the appeals were consolidated and heard together by the Additional District Judge (Special), Baghpat with Civil Appeal No. 9 of 2005 being treated as the leading case. The learned Additional District Judge dismissed both the appeals by a common judgment, but separate decrees dtd. 28/5/2012.

(3.) Second Appeal No. 734 of 2012 has been preferred by Anand Prakash Sharma from the decree passed in Civil Appeal No. 9 of 2005. He has preferred Second Appeal No. 733 of 2012 from the decree passed in Civil Appeal No. 10 of 2005. Both the appeals have been admitted to hearing by this Court vide separate orders dtd. 30/4/2014 on the same substantial question of law, which reads: