SANTHAVEERAPPA Vs. K N JANARDHANACHARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Miscellaneous Second Appeal preferred by the defendant against the judgment and decree of the first Appellate Court which has set aside the judgment and decree of the Trial Court without going into the merits, but only on the ground that the application filed under Order 41 Rule 27 requires to be considered and then remanded the matter to the Trial Court for fresh consideration in accordance with law.

(2.) I have heard the Learned Counsel for the parties. The questions that arise for consideration in this appeal are:-

(3.) THE plaintiff filed a suit for the relief of declaration of title and for permanent injunction against the defendant. Suit was contested. Ultimately, the suit came to be decreed partly declaring that the plaintiff is the owner of three items of the property. In respect of the said extent of land a decree for permanent injunction was granted. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the plaintiff preferred a regular Appeal. In the Regular Appeal he filed an application under order 41 Rule 27 CPC for production of additional evidence and produced 28 documents. Objections were filed for production of the said documents by the respondent. The first Appellate Court heard the appeal on merits and also the application filed under Order 41 rule 27 CPC. After setting out the facts of the case, issues involved and the points for consideration, it declined to go into the merits of the judgment and decree of the Trial Court. On the contrary it held that the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC requires to be allowed. Because of that finding it set aside the entire judgment and decree of the Trial Court and remanded the matter to the Trial Court for fresh consideration in accordance with law in the light of the 28 documents produced by the plaintiff. Aggrieved by this order of remand, the defendant is in second appeal.