Civil retrial application template

Applicant xx, male, xx years old, Han nationality, peasant, live in XX Town, Baoshan Village.

Applicant xx and the respondent xx and xx forest land infringement dispute case, dissatisfied with the xx intermediate people's court x Min Yi Zhong Zi No. xx civil judgment and the xx county people's court Ba Min Chu Zi No. 95 civil judgment dissatisfied, apply for retrial.

Request

1. Request to revoke the civil judgment of No. 95 of the XX County People's Court, Ba Min Chu Zi No. 95, xx Intermediate People's Court x Min Yi Zhong Zi No. 620, and change the judgment according to law.

Second, first and second trial costs are borne by the respondent

Facts and reasons

At the beginning of 1990, the Nanshan Village Committee of xx Town, where I was located, negotiated with the applicant to contract me to the 3.7-mu land of the south of the village, which was the land of Wang Zhencheng, and the contract period was 20 years. At that time, it was a wasteland, and it was the uphill slope of the ditch. In addition, the imperfect land management system at that time did not sign a written contract, but a verbal agreement.

In the spring of 1990, I found Xu Feng in the village to use the four-wheeled vehicle to turn the ground. After one year of drying, I planted it for two years in 1991 and 1992. In 1993, I saw the pits and bumps, and the crops were not planted. Long, bought a sapling, planted willows and poplars. Zhu Hua, the village secretary at the time of XX, asked me to pay the contract fee. I handed it to the village director Zhang Guang 300 yuan on August 20 of the same year. Later, Zhu Hua said that he was handed over again. I was on November 28 of the same year. Handed over to Zhu Hua 600 yuan.

On December 30, XX, the village committee asked me to extend the contract period for 40 years. The two parties signed a written contract and filed it at the town forestry workstation.

In July 2019, Wang Zhen cut off the tree I planted and was stopped by me. After the king sued the court, he claimed that I was infringed, demanded to bear the tort liability, and ordered that the contract signed between me and the village was invalid. After the first trial was defeated, the applicant protested and the second trial upheld the original judgment. Now I propose a retrial. I believe that the first-instance and second-instance judgments are unclear, the law is wrong, and the program is illegal. The main reasons are as follows:

Unclear

I am not a piece of land with the forest land contracted by xx. I can confirm this fact from xx and my respective contract four.

The second item of the afforestation contractual contract submitted by xx records: “The contract is in the west to the Cuide Fangdong Avenue in the west, the west to the west of the Erlong Irrigation Canal, the south to the arid channel; the north to the north of the dry channel. In the 25-mu contracted land, the Shanhong Crossing North Erlong Irrigation Canal is located in the middle of the Nanshan Village, all the sections of the Nanshan Village, from the south to the Shanhong Intersection, the north to the first Xiaoqiao South of the Erlong Canal, the east of the canal along the bottom, and the west to the bottom of the canal. .

From the four records described in the above contract:

1 Wang Chengbao's plot is divided into two parts: the former part of the land that caused controversy, the latter part is two kilometers south of the plot, and has nothing to do with the case.

2 In fact, the land contracted by Wang is an east-west gully, with the south to the bottom of the dry channel---the north to the north of the dry channel, the east-west is the length, the north-south is the width, and the two "bottom" characters are not It is difficult to see that Wang Zhencheng’s land covers only the land area at the bottom of the ditch on the north-south boundary, and the slopes on both sides of the ditch are not within the contract. The bottom of the ditch has a width of more than 50 meters, and the narrowest part is more than 15 meters wide. The northern slope of the waste ditch is the contracted land of Zhang Hong and Li Gui, and the southern slope of the waste ditch is on the forest land that I contracted.

3 Since Wang Chengbao, his ruins have never been ruled, and some trees have been grown in the ditch. So far, no tree has been laid. From the above four to prove that: four to the south to the Shanhong intersection, north to the second bridge of the second dragon channel south, east to the bottom of the channel, west to the bottom of the channel. This shows that only the second plot is suitable for afforestation. This land has nothing to do with the case.

The sixth item of the contract between me and the village committee records that the land that Party A has sent to Party B is four: east to Sunlong, head to the canal, west to the crossing, south to the nine teams, and north to the ditch. Four to clear and uncontroversial. Description:

1 I don't coincide with Wang's contracted land. The two sides are only in the north. Wang Chengbao is the area of ​​the bottom of the ditch. The applicant is a group of land in the south and the ditch in the north. When you go to the field, you will see that the four contracts referred to in the two contracts do not coincide. The applicant contracted the slope of the gully, with a width of 7 meters at the widest point and 2 meters at the narrowest point, totaling 3.7 acres.

2 From 1990 to XX, although there was no written contract with the village, one was not standardized in rural land management at the time, and the second applicant had invested a lot of manpower and material resources for many years, and paid the contracting fee in XX. I have formed a de facto contracting relationship with the village. In XX, due to the extension of the contract period, the village signed a contract with me.

It should be noted that the applicant and the king are both a village, but not in a group. When the township was merged with the village in XX, the nine groups of Nanshan Village where I was located were placed in the current group of Baobao Village, and the group of Nanshan Village where Wang Zhen was located was placed in the second group of the present village. Whether it is the former Nanshan Village or the current village, the land rights between the groups are independent, and the boundaries of each group are clear. Over the years, there have never been land disputes in each group. The land contract of each group of villagers is managed by the village.

There is no overlap between the respective contractual contracts, and where is the infringement.

"The defendant Qibaoshan Village Committee does not recognize that there is no contract with me." There is no evidence for this determination.

In the absence of any investigation into the above facts, the courts of the second and second instance arbitrarily and arbitrarily determined that “the defendant’s Baoshan Village Committee did not recognize the contractual contract with the defendant Gao Jianguo”. First, the judgment of the second-instance court clearly stated that the defendant Qibaoshan Village Committee did not appear in court in the first instance and the second instance, nor did it submit a written reply. Nor did it submit any evidence to the court that the village committee did not recognize the contract with me. However, it is strange that the courts of the first and second courts have determined that the village committee of the Baotou Mountain does not recognize that there is a contract with me, which is ridiculous.

Evidence is the legal basis for the court to ascertain the facts. Without evidence, the court can use the sentence in a word to make the applicant's efforts for twenty years into a void, so how can the judgment be convincing? Moreover, the court of second instance determined that I had kept a copy of the contract system of the xx County Forestry Bureau, and the copy of the contract stated that if the disputed contract was invalidated, it means that even if the original is provided, it is invalid. The court of second instance did not carefully review the other provisions of the contract, only paying attention to the disadvantages of the applicant. Why didn't you see the four terms that were clear and uncontroversial? Moreover, the applicant's contract did not dispute with anyone. The first and second instance court biased Wang Zhen is obvious.

In addition, copies are not used as evidence. According to the rules of evidence, the documentary evidence collected by the investigators may be the original or a copy or a copy that has been verified.

Moreover, it is indeed uncontroversial for my contract with the village committee. Until now, no one has come up with a contract with me to repeat the contract.

Second, the program is illegal

The applicant applied to the court for a request for on-site inspection, but the court did not perform its duties and lost the opportunity to ascertain the facts of the case.

Wang Zhen applied to the court to investigate witnesses, while the court of first instance supported this request. According to the provisions of Article 17 of the Rules of Evidence: evidence that the parties and their agents are unable to collect on their own for objective reasons. Is it possible for the witness to investigate the agent and not collect it by himself? Need the court to exercise litigation rights on behalf of the parties? In addition, according to Article 55 of the Rules of Evidence, witnesses shall appear in court to testify and accept questions from the parties. The witness did not appear in court. Violation of the testimony provided by the statutory procedure, the court can directly accept the letter without questioning; and the witnesses I provide to testify in the court, but not accepted, then which one proves to be more effective, this is a self-evident fact.

In the first instance, the defendant Baoshan Village Committee did not appear in court. The court applied for the investigation of the person in charge of the village committee according to the plaintiff and then acted as evidence against me.

First of all, let's not say whether it is right or wrong, but the second-instance court cannot agree with this. The village committee as the defendant is the interested person in the case. They are equal to testifying themselves. This is obvious. Can such testimony be accepted? ? Moreover, the two testimonies only prove the facts of Wang Chengbao's river beach, and did not deny the fact that I contracted the contract. The court is really a hole in the wind.

Third and second instance courts apply legal errors

Due to the unclear facts of the case, the courts of the first and second courts applied legal errors. The real infringer is Wang Zhen, not me. The courts of the first and second instance are upside down and judged that I infringed, contrary to the facts and laws.

In summary, the judgments of the original first-instance and second-instance courts have serious errors in both the de facto determination and the application of the law, which violates the provisions of Article 179 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China and seriously damages them. The legal rights of the applicant. The applicant has filed a retrial application in accordance with the provisions of Article 179 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China. In order to maintain the fairness and impartiality of the law and ensure the correct implementation of the law, the People's Court is requested to re-examine the case on the basis of the facts.

Sincerely

Xx higher people's court

Applicant: xx