Charan Singh vs Ram Saroop - S 96 CPC -Composite Appeal

Code of Civil Procedure - Section 96 - Order XLI Rule 1 - Trial Court dismissed suit and allowed counter claim - Instead of filing two appeals with separate memoranda of appeal, the appellant - plaintiff filed one composite appeal challenging the common judgment and order of the trial court. The first appellate court dismissed the appeal as not maintainable since the appellant had not filed two separate appeals - HC upheld the dismissal - Allowing appeal, SC observed: A composite appeal was not maintainable in law but, at the same time, the first appellate court ought to have borne in mind that courts exist for rendering justice albeit in accordance with law- In terms of Order XLI Rule 1 of the CPC, the appellate court has the power to even dispense with the requirement of law of filing copy of the impugned judgment twice over if it is part of the memorandum of appeal already filed- the court ought to have at least alerted the appellant by making him aware of the requirement of law and giving him the liberty to file a separate memorandum of appeal - If even after being alerted the appellant had failed to file a separate memorandum, the first appellate court would have been perfectly justified in dismissing the appeal- Technicality of a nature such as this should not have been allowed to prevail over substantive justice. (Para 7-8)