SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Sanjiv Khanna, M.M. Sundresh, JJ.
Arvind Kumar Jaiswal (D) Thr. Lr. – Appellant
Versus
Devendra Prasad Jaiswal Varun – Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 1059 of 2023 (@ SLP (C) No. 9172 of 2020)
Decided On : 13-02-2023
Fact of the Case:
The High Court remanded a case to the trial court based on certain provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure.Finding of the Court:
The Supreme Court held that an order of remand should not be passed unless a re-trial is required or there is no complete adjudication and material prejudice has been suffered. In this case, as evidence was already adduced and available, the High Court's order of remand was set aside.Issues:
Whether the High Court's order of remand was justified under the relevant provisions of the Code.Ratio Decidendi:
An order of remand should only be passed if a re-trial is necessary or there is insufficient evidence to dispose of the matter. If evidence has been adduced and a decision can be made based on it, a remand should not be ordered.Final Decision:
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment, and restored the first appeal before the High Court for decision on its merits in accordance with law.ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. In our opinion, the impugned judgment of the High Court remanding the case to the trial court by relying upon Section 33 and Order XX of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (the 'Code'), overlooks the provisions of Rule 23, 23A, 24 and 25 of Order XLI of the Code.
3. An order of remand prolongs and delays the litigation and hence, should not be passed unless the appellate court finds that a re-trial is required, or the evidence on record is not sufficient to dispose of the matter for reasons like lack of adequate opportunity of leading evidence to a party, where there had been no real trial of the dispute or there is no complete or effectual adjudication of the proceedings, and the party complaining has suffered material prejudice on that account.[1] Where evidence has already been adduced and a decision can be rendered on appreciation of such evidence, an order of remand should not be passed remitting the matter to the lower court, even if the lower court has omitted to frame issue(s) and/or has failed to determine any question of fact, which, in the opinion of the appellate court, is essential. The first appellate court, if required, can also direct the trial court to record evidence and finding on a particular aspect/issue in terms of Rule 25 to Order XLI, which then can be taken on record for deciding the case by the appellate court.
[1] See Shivakumar and Others v. Sharanabasappa and Others, (2021) 11 SCC 277; and Bachahan Devi and Another v. Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur and Another, (2008) 12 SCC 372.
4. In the present case, the High Court, as the first appellate court, which is also a court of fact and law, has passed an order of remand observing that the judgment of the trial court was, in its opinion, not written as per the mandate of Section 33 and Rule 4(2) and 5 of Order XX of the Code, as the discussion and reasoning on certain aspects was not detailed and elaborate.
5. This is not a case where the evidence is not adduced and on record. In fact, the first portion of the judgment of the High Court elaborately records the contention of the parties and the facts and evidence relied by the parties.
6. In view of the aforesaid, we allow the present appeal, and set aside the impugned judgment and restore the first appeal to its original number before the High Court, to be decided on merits and in accordance with law, as per the provision of order XLI of the Code. As the appeal has been pending for a considerable time, the High court would decide the appeal expeditiously as possible.
7. We clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on merits of the of case. There would be no order as to costs.
8. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
Bachahan Devi and Another v. Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur and Another
An order of remand should only be made if there are valid reasons such as lack of complete adjudication or material prejudice suffered due to lack of opportunity for leading evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited circumstances under which remand is permissible and the need to decide the case on merits rather than remanding it back to the trial co....
An order of remand should not be passed as a matter of course and should only be considered when a retrial is necessary. The Appellate Court should exercise its jurisdiction under Rule 24 of Order XL....
Remand of case to trial court is not permissible when evidence on record covers material for adjudication of every issues involved in suit.
it is not permissible to remit back the commissioner’s report, though a second commission is permissible.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the enabling power of the Appellate Court to remit the case back to the trial court as regulated by Order XLI Rule 23 and ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.