RSA No. 2922 of 2002 (1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Date of Decision: 21.8.2009
(i) RSA No. 2922 of 2002.
Blue Bells Model School, Gurgaon ......Appellant
Versus
Manisha Malhotra and another .......Respondents
(ii) RSA No.2924 of 2002.
Blue Bells Model School ……Appellant
Versus
Jitender Kakkar and another …….Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA.
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present: Shri Anupam Gupta, Advocate, for the appellant.
None for respondent No.1.
Shri Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral).
This order shall dispose of RSA Nos. 2922 and 2924 of 2002,
as both these appeals raise common questions of law and facts.
Defendant No.2 is in second appeal aggrieved against the
RSA No. 2922 of 2002 (2)
judgment and decree passed by the learned first Appellate Court, whereby
the plaintiff was granted liberty to sue for damages in accordance with law,
if so desired.
Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the liberty
granted is prejudicial to the interests of the appellant and that the adverse
findings have been recorded without impleading the necessary parties and
without there being any pleadings or evidence of malice. He contends that
the findings recorded are wholly unjustified and cannot be treated to be
binding in a subsequent suit for damages, if any, filed by the plaintiff.
This Court has issued notice of motion on 5.12.2005, on the
following substantial question of law:-
“Whether in the absence of any evidence of mala-fide on
the part of the defendant-appellant any finding could be
arrived at and liberty could be granted to the plaintiff-
respondent for filing a suit for damages?
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the
opinion that in a suit for declaration where the plaintiff has claimed only a
right to appear in the examination, there was neither any pleading nor any
issue framed regarding mala-fide action on the part of the appellant-School
or any of its functionaries, therefore, the Courts could not grant liberty to
the plaintiff to claim damages. The relief granted to the plaintiff has to be
read in the context of pleadings proved. It will only mean that as and when
the plaintiff choses to file a suit for damages, the issue of mala-fide on the
part of the appellant-School or its functionaries, is to be examined on the
basis of evidence to be led in the said suit. The findings recorded in the
present suit are relevant only for the purpose of grant of decree to the
plaintiff as set out in the plaint. Any finding returned in the present suit,
RSA No. 2922 of 2002 (3)
cannot be treated to be relevant in a suit for damages, if any filed by the
plaintiff.
With the above observations, both the appeals stand disposed
of.
(HEMANT GUPTA)
JUDGE
21.8.2009
ds