Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
HIRDESH
Shantilal (Dead) Through Lrs – Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Chandra – Respondent
ORDER :
The instant misc. appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(u) of CPC has been filed by appellants assailing order of remand dated 26-04-2019 passed by First Additional District Judge, Sironj, District Vidisha in Civil Appeal No.9-A of 2017, whereby the judgment and decree dated 31-01-2017 passed by Civil Judge, Class-II, Lateri, District Vidisha in Civil Suit No. 34-A of 2013, has been reversed and set aside.
(2) A few facts necessary for adjudication of this appeal as narrated therein are that plaintiff- respondent No.1 herein filed a civil suit seeking declaration of title and injunction in respect of land bearing survey no. 16 ad-meauring 0.696 hectare and survey no. 100 ad-measuring 1.669 hectare situated in Village Bamori, Tehsil Lateri, District Vidisha. It was pleaded by plaintiff that he has purchased the disputed land vide registered sale deed dated 22-05-2002 from defendant No.1 Shantilal. On 10-09- 2013, when he went to spot to cut his agricultural crop, he found presence of defendants, who gave threat with dire consequences to him if he cuts the crop.
(3) Defendants no. 1 and 2 (appellants herein) filed their written statement and pleaded that defendant no.1 has never executed
Amendments under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC are strictly scrutinized, especially after trial commencement, and remands should only occur under justifiable circumstances, not routinely.
Remand orders must adhere to strict procedural requirements; mere routine remanding without due diligence in evidence withholding is impermissible.
Appellate court cannot admit additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC absent due diligence proof or necessity for judgment; must record reasons; erroneous allowance despite negligence and delay....
The Appellate Court cannot remand a case without meeting the specific criteria outlined in the Civil Procedure Code, particularly under Order 41, Rules 23, 23-A, or 25.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the scope of Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC, which allows the appellate court to permit additional evidence in exceptional circumstances, and the part....
Amendments altering the fundamental nature of a case are impermissible; evidence must align with pleadings for consideration in civil litigation.
Court ruled that procedural amendment requests should be allowed even after the trial begins, provided they clarify existing claims and do not introduce new issues.
The appellate court must decide cases based on available evidence and cannot remand without necessity, as doing so prolongs litigation without serving justice.
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
