Back
ANIL KSHETARPAL
Naresh Kumar @ Naresh Kohli – Appellant
Versus
Raksha – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Anil Kshetarpal, J.
This Second Appeal against the First Appellate Court’s order remitting the matter back to the trial court has been filed by the defendants.
2. In order to comprehend the issues involved in the present case, some relevant facts, in brief, are required to be noticed.
3. Smt. Santosh and her daughter Smt. Raksha jointly filed a suit for the grant of decree of declaration to the effect that the defendants are joint owners in possession of super structure of shop no.133 existing over the municipal site, which was previously in possession of Sh.Girdhari Lal alongwith the plaintiffs as joint tenants. The plaintiffs also prayed for partition of the property by metes and bounds and for decree of permanent injunction. The suit was dismissed after the defendants contested the suit. Smt. Raksha-plaintiff no.2 filed the first appeal in the year 2016. She filed an application for leading additional evidence in the year 2017. The First Appellate Court has allowed the application under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’). The First Appellate Court has also noticed that there is a typographical omission in the memo of
Remand of a case requires substantial grounds and cannot be based solely on procedural errors or the allowance of additional evidence.
The appellate court's power to remand is limited to specific conditions under the CPC, emphasizing the need for a thorough evaluation of the trial court's judgment.
The Appellate Court must set aside the lower court's judgment on merits before remanding a case under Order XLI Rule 23A of the CPC, emphasizing caution in remand orders.
The appellate court must properly consider existing evidence and procedural requirements before remanding, ensuring fairness in addressing substantive claims.
The First Appellate Court's power to remit cases is governed strictly by the CPC, and must only be exercised when necessary to ensure fair trial.
Judicial efficiency mandates that remand for fresh disposal should only occur when necessary; a remanding court must determine the parties' shares or justify retrial necessity, which was neglected he....
The appellate court must provide cogent reasons for remanding a case, and it should decide based on existing evidence if sufficient, rather than remanding without due justification.
Remand of cases must strictly follow the provisions of the CPC, and inherent powers cannot be invoked when specific rules govern the remand process.
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
