NARAYAN ACHARYA Vs. KISHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner/plaintiff has challenged the order dated 19.06.2012 (Annexure P-1), whereby his application under Order 14 Rule 5 of CPC is rejected by the Court below. The parties have advanced arguments against the impugned order only with regard to the portion of the order dated 19.06.2012, whereby the said application (Annexure P-5) is rejected by the court below.

(2.) SHRI Rajnish Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, criticized the order and submits that the court below has erred in not framing the necessary issues. He submits that in the issue already framed vide Annexure P-4, the issues proposed are not covered and court below has erred in holding that the existing issues cover the proposed issues. He criticized the order by saying that the impugned order is hyper technical in nature and court below ought to have allowed the application for framing additional issues, so that parties can address the Court properly. He further submits that in absence of framing of necessary issues, a prejudice is caused to the plaintiff and in absence of framing of proper issues there is a likelihood of miscarriage of justice.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.