Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a declaration could be sustained when it was founded on a question not raised by the pleadings and expressly disclaimed in the statement of complaint, and whether the decree granting such declaration had to be set aside and the matter remitted for determination of the pleaded issues.
Analysis: The proceedings showed that the dispute originally joined was confined to the place from which gravel had been taken and whether that place formed part of the bed of the stream. The later question on which the declaration was granted was not part of the pleaded case and had not been properly put in issue by amendment. A court cannot determine and grant relief on a matter outside the issues framed by the pleadings, especially where the parties have not been given the opportunity to lead evidence on that matter. In such circumstances, even if the question may be important, the proper course is to set aside the declaration and remit the case so that the pleaded issues, and any additional issues allowed by amendment, may be heard and determined.
Conclusion: The declaration was set aside because it was based on an unpleaded issue, and the case was remitted to the Supreme Court for determination of the proper issues.
Ratio Decidendi: Relief cannot be founded on and decided upon an issue that was not raised by the pleadings and on which the parties had no proper opportunity to adduce evidence.