Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Anil R. Dave, Adarsh Kumar Goel, JJ.
A.A. Prakasan – Appellants
Versus
Anupama & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 4241-4242 of 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Civil) Nos.16228-16229 of 2012)
Decided On : 19-04-2016
Amendment - Remand - The court held that the High Court's decision to permit amendment did not automatically warrant setting aside the judgment of the trial court and remanding the matter. The court emphasized that the necessity of framing additional issues and permitting further evidence should be considered before setting aside the judgment.
Fact of the Case:
The High Court permitted an amendment, set aside the judgment of the trial court, and remanded the matter.
Finding of the Court:
The court set aside the impugned judgment passed by the High Court and directed the High Court to consider the matter afresh in accordance with the law.
Issues: The necessity of framing additional issues and permitting further evidence before setting aside the judgment.
Ratio Decidendi: Remand could be ordered only if the judgment of the trial court was erroneous and the appeal court could not decide the matter, and not merely on an amendment being allowed.
Final Decision: The appeals were disposed of as allowed, and the parties were directed to appear before the High Court for further proceedings.
JUDGMENT :
Adarsh Kumar Goel, J.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. Leave granted.
3. The High Court has as a consequence of its decision to permit amendment, set aside the judgment of the trial court and remanded the matter. We are of the view that even after the amendment was permitted, further question whether any fresh issue was required to be framed or fresh evidence was to be led was required to be gone into before setting aside the judgment. In case it becomes necessary to frame additional issue and permit the parties to lead further evidence, a report could be called for from the trial court on such additional issue. Remand could be ordered only if the judgment of the trial court was erroneous and the appeal court could not decide the matter and not merely on an amendment being allowed.
4. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on merits, we set aside the impugned judgment passed by the High Court. The High Court may consider the matter afresh in accordance with law.
5. Parties shall appear before the High Court for further proceedings on 25th July, 2016.
6. The appeals stand disposed of as allowed. No order as to costs.
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
