Pramod Shroff v. Mohan Singh Chopra, 2026

The appellant filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell.

The suit proceeded ex parte against the respondent.

The trial court dismissed the suit, holding that the appellant failed to prove the title of the respondent over the suit property.

Notably, no issue was framed regarding the respondent’s title.

The Calcutta High Court upheld the trial court’s decision.

The appellant approached the Supreme Court, arguing that:

• He was never put to notice to prove respondent’s title.

• In absence of an issue, he could not reasonably be expected to lead evidence on that point.

The Court held that formal framing of issues is not mandatory in ex parte suits.

However, courts must still identify and decide “points for determination”, which serve the same purpose as issues.

It emphasized that a reasoned judgment is mandatory under CPC.

The Court clarified that mere default or ex parte status does not justify mechanical decrees or dismissals.

It held that failure to identify issues/points may amount to a material irregularity.

The Court found that:

• The suit was dismissed on the ground of lack of title.

• No issue or point for determination existed on that aspect.

• The appellant had no opportunity to present evidence.

The judgment authored by Justice Masih concluded that this caused serious prejudice.

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court and trial court decisions.

The judgment reinforces the importance of procedural fairness, even in ex parte proceedings.

It clarifies that “points for determination” act as a substitute for issues.

Strengthens the principle that justice must not be mechanical or technical.

Emphasizes natural justice, particularly the right to notice and opportunity.

Prevents courts from deciding cases on unframed and unexpected grounds.

Ensures compliance with reasoned judgment requirements under CPC.

The ruling promotes fair trial standards and reduces arbitrariness in civil adjudication.