SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1965 Supreme(Cal) 141

P.N.MUKHERJEE
MRIGENDRA KUMAR MAJUMDAR – Appellant
Versus
SIDHESHWAR SHIT – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.K.PANDEY, J.K.Sen Gupta, J.M.DE, J.N.NANDA, R.N.BHATTACHARJI

P. N. MOOKERJEE, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is by the plain tiffs. It is directed against an order of remand by the lower appellate court, sending the case back to the trial court for a fresh trial in the light of certain observations, made in its judgment.

( 2 ) THE order is plainly one under Order 41, Rule 23 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and therefore not appealable under Order 43, Rule 1, Clause (u) of the Code. The remand was, obviously, under Section 151 of the Code. It is difficult to hold that such a remand is appealable, particularly when the lower appellate court, in making this order, did not fully decide or conclusively determine anything on the merits or any of the disputes between the parties or any of their disputed rights but left the entire matter for decision to the trial court in the light of certain directions, given in its Judgment. It is difficult to hold that such an order would amount to a decree under the Code to attract to it the appeal provisions therein. Upon that view, which is amply supported by authorities (Vide e. g. Banka Behari v. Birendra Nath, (1928) 17 Cal LJ 69: (AIR 1927 Cal 850), if it unnecessary for me to express any opinion on the debatable


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top