Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ANIL KSHETARPAL
Kiran Sarangal – Appellant
Versus
Allround Sporting Balls – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Anil Kshetarpal, J.
With the consent of learned counsel representing the parties, two connected second appeals against the First Appellate Court's order remitting the matter back to the trial Court for fresh decision shall stand disposed of by this common order.
2. There are following two partnership firms:-
The names of its partners alongwith their shares are as below:-
Kiran Sarangal | 45% |
Ajay Sarangal | 10% |
Sunita Sarangal | 45% |
The names of its partners alongwith their shares are as below:-
Anant Ram Sarangal | 25% |
Ajay Sarangal | 25% |
C.L. Sarangal | 25% |
Munish Sarangal | 25% |
3. Two suits were filed for rendition of accounts, in which, preliminary decree was passed as the defendants agreed to render the accounts as per balance-sheet dated 31.03.2003. The preliminary decree in both the suits were passed on 02.09.2008. The proceedings for final decree were initiated. The Executing Court amalgamated immovable properties of both the firms and thereafter proceeded to divide them by metes and bounds. Against the final decree, two appeals were preferred. The First Appellate Court found that the process adopted to divide the property and rendition of accounts is not correct, hence, remitted the matter back
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.
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 a case requires substantial grounds and cannot be based solely on procedural errors or the allowance of additional evidence.
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 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 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 ....
An appellate court's order of remand must not introduce new issues not raised by the parties and should only be issued when necessary for justice, adhering to existing pleadings and evidence.
The First Appellate Court's remittance of a case to the trial Court was improper as it did not follow the procedural requirements of the Code of Civil Procedure.
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
