From two areas questions are normally given in the exam, one of which will be from Appeal and another one will be from Revision. The questions will appear in the form of scenarios. Basically a scenario will be given and you will be asked to suggest your client according to the scenario.
Appeal-
Section 96 and 97 deals with Appeal. Section 96 talks about "Appeals from original Decree".
According to Section 96 –
Code or (1) Save where otherwise expressly provided in the body of this by any other law for the time being in force, an appeal shall lie from every decree passed by any Court exercising original jurisdiction to the Court authorized to hear appeals from the decisions of such Court.
(2) An appeal may lie from an original decree passed ex parte.
(3) No appeal shall lie from a decree passed by the Court with the consent of parties.
And Section 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure (herein after CPC) states that –
"Where any party aggrieved by a preliminary decree passed after the commencement of this Code does not appeal from such decree, he shall be precluded from disputing its correctness in any appeal which may be preferred from the final decree."
The above sections clarify the areas where an appeal may lie. Now have a look at the solved answers of the previous years’ questions came in the exam.
Answer to the question of 2011 -
District- Dhaka
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH
HIGH COURT DIVISION
(CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION)
Memorandum of Appeal from Original Decree
First Appeal Tender No. of 2011
First Appeal No. of 2011
IN THE MATTER OF :
A
Son of
Of,…
Vill-
P.S.-
……………Plaintiff-Appellant
Versus
B
Son of,
Of,
Vill-
P.S.-
…..…Defendant-Respondent
Suit Valued at Tk. 5000000
Appeal Valued at Tk. 5000000
Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 10.7.2011 passed by the 1st Court of Joint District Judge, Dhaka in Title Suit No.123 of 2011 rejecting the plaint of the said suit, the plaintiffs-appellant begs to prefer this Memorandum of Appeal on the following amongst other,
Grounds
I. For that the impugned judgment and decree is bad in facts and law as well.
II. For that the learned Judges have failed to apply his judicial mind in passing the impugned judgment and decree, and the judgment passed is not a judgment in the eye of law.
III. For that the lower appellate Court had traveled beyond its jurisdiction by dismissing the suit and as such judgment and order passed by the Trial Court is wholly illegal, malafide and unsustainable in the eye of law.
IV. For that the learned Joint District Judge without considering the facts and circumstances of the suit, exhibits and evidences on record on his own assumption found that the plaintiff could not prove the possession on the suit land and thereby committed miscarriage of justice in decreeing the suit not tenable in law.
V. For that considering the facts and circumstances of the suit and materials on record the learned Joint District Judge ought to have decreed the suit on plaintiff’s favor.
VI. For that the learned Joint District Judge acted on his own surmise and conjecture in deciding the issues involved in the suit.
VII. For that the Learned Joint District Judge most illegally and arbitrarily gave stress upon the claim of the defendant overlooking the facts and circumstances of the case and materials on record.
VIII. For that the learned Joint District Judge illegally based his findings in favour of the defendant in deciding the suit, based on assumption, contrary to the materials on record.
IX. For that the Learned Joint District Judge failed to consider that the plaintiff succeeded to prove the case in accordance with law and hence the impugned Judgment and Decree is not tenable in law.
CERTIFICATE
I have gone the records of the suit and found good grounds of appeal and having prepared them I undertake to support them at the time of hearing.
Advocate
List of papers:
1. Memo of Appeal - 1 copy
2. Judgment and Decree - 1 copy
3. Vokalatnama - 1 copy
4. Second Judge’s Copy - 1 copy
Total - 4 copies
No comments:
Post a Comment