Civil retrial application template

Applicant: Li Jieyou, male, ×, Han, peasant. Live in Kutihe Village, Zhonghe Town, Zhalantun City, Inner Mongolia; mailing address-.

Respondent: Wu Zaifu, male, ×, aged, Manchu, village head; mailing address: 2nd Street, Kutihe Village, Zhonghe Town, Zhalantun City.

The third person: Jing Shugui, male, × year old, Han nationality, cadre, live in Zhonghe Town, Kudihe Village Street.

Application reason:

In the case of retrial of the debtor, the applicant refused to accept the retrial of the retrial request in the case of the Intermediate Military Court of the Inner Mongolia High Court, and the reasons were as follows:

1, the original judgment of the people's case, qualitative inaccuracy, entity error! Violation of basic facts and laws.

2. The final case of the civil case violates the statutory procedure, and the case against the lawsuit is not reviewed and the original judgment is maintained.

3. The civil case is re-examined, ignoring the nature of the case, overturning the original judgment error, and making a refusal to re-appeal.

The mistakes in the third-instance judgment of this case are in accordance with the provisions of the first paragraph, 2, 3, 4, 6, 10, and 11 of Article 179 of the Civil Procedure Law: there is new evidence sufficient to overthrow the original If the basic facts of the judgment and the original judgment are lack of evidence, the evidence is forged, the applicable law is wrong, the deprivation of the parties' power to debate, the omission of the original judgment, and the second paragraph that violates the legal procedure affecting the correct judgment of the case, the reason for the retrial shall be retried.

Requests:

1. The first-, final, and re-trial judgments of the two-level courts shall be revoked; the respondent's appeal shall be rejected; and the order shall bear all litigation costs.

2. The respondent is ordered to pay the arrears × yuan.

3. The respondent's claim is malicious and should be punished, and the damages caused by the order will be RMB × yuan.

Dispute facts:

The applicant and the bank agreed to be a 70 square meter soil tile structure. Signed the "Declaration of Mortgage" and "Deal of Selling House". After the respondent purchased, he requested 115 square meters of brick-and-mortar residential houses facing the street; regardless of the subject of civil acts and the agreed targets, he appealed to the court to award the house.

The original judgment of the civil case:

Deliberately violating the basic facts and the law, using the debt to misinterpret the case, circumventing the contract, and making a judgment contrary to the agreement: the defendant poured out the plaintiff's Tuwa structure house.

1. Evidence is sufficient to overthrow the original judgment: “Custody Contract”, “Selling Contract”, “Repayment Voucher”, and house photos are the key evidence for determining the facts of the dispute, the nature of the case, the subject matter of the agreement, and the subject of the civil act; Proof of certification! It is in conformity with the provisions of Article 179 of the Civil Procedure Law, "there is new evidence, which is sufficient to overturn the original judgment."

2. The basic facts ascertained by the original judgment lacked evidence to prove that the facts found were forged and there was no cross-examination.

The mortgage of the property of the source of the dispute; the debt dispute was found without evidence.

The signature of Pan Zhenlin and the "Family Photo" of 63 square meters of grass and grass house are unclear; the date signed by the village committee is the invalidation of invalid documents after the sale of the house and the construction of brick and tile structure; it is not proved. The basis for the final decision is not certified.

Such a trial error is in line with the provisions of paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of Section 179 of the Civil Procedure Law. “The basic facts found in the original judgment ruling lacks evidence to prove” and “the main evidence of the facts determined by the original judgment is forged” And "the original judgment ruled that the main evidence of the facts was not cross-examined."

3. The original law applies the wrong law: the mortgage dispute of the property is judged by the credit terms of the General Principles of the Civil Law, which is obviously inconsistent with the nature of the dispute. It is in conformity with the provisions of Article 6 of Article 179 of the Civil Procedure Law, “the original judgment ruling applies to the law is indeed wrong”.

4. Missing original judgment: At the trial, the defendant counterclaimed that the plaintiff’s arrears were not certified. It is in conformity with the provisions of Item 12 of Article 179 of the Civil Procedure Law, “The original judgment ruled that the omission was exceeded or exceeded the claim”.

Final review of the civil case:

In the case of confrontation, the trial is not subject to the judgment, and it violates the statutory procedure of Article 152 of the Civil Procedure Law, “The case against the lawsuit should be heard and the party is questioned”. It is in conformity with the provisions of Article 179 of the Civil Procedure Law, "The violation of the legal procedure may affect the correct judgment of the case" and the stipulation of a stipulation of 10 items of "Article 179, which violates the law and deprives the parties of the power of debate."

The final case of the civil case:

The key evidence for determining the facts of the dispute, the nature of the case, the subject matter of the agreement, and the subject of the civil act, which is sufficient to overturn the original judgment, is still not certifying the certification; the original judgment is wrong, and the judgment of rejecting the retrial appeal is subjectively determined.

In summary:

The two-tier courts tried to make a false judgment on the “two trials and repeated trials” of the debt case in the case of deliberate violation of the basic facts of the mortgage purchase and related laws and regulations.

The respondent violated the right of legal action and malicious appeal; there is no evidence to prove this lawsuit and this lawsuit! It is a very means to interfere with the destruction of judicial justice, and the innocent applicants are in the lawsuit; they suffer heavy damage and spiritual torture in all aspects of life. The resulting damage must be compensated.

Malicious litigation, the evils of the country and the people are not allowed! In order to effectively sanction and curb civil malicious acts, it demonstrates justice and upholds the dignity of the law;

Sincerely