(1.) This appeal from order takes exception to the judgment and order dated 4th August, 2007 in Reg. Civil Appeal No. 38/2006 passed by the Ad-hoc District Judge-1, Latur. The Learned Counsel for the appellants submits that the remand order passed by the Appellate Court was absolutely unwarranted in the facts of this case. Without any discussion by the Appellate Court on merits of the matter, by cryptic reasoning in para 12 of the impugned judgment, the matter has been remanded back to the trial Court for fresh decision. The Learned Counsel also invited my attention to the substantial questions of law which are tendered across the Bar and taken on record. He submitted that the Appellate Court itself is competent and having jurisdiction and empowered like the Court of original jurisdiction to decide the issues and, therefore, it was not necessary for the Appellate Court to remand the matter back to the trial Court.
(2.) On the other hand, the Learned Counsel for the respondent submits that, in the interest of justice, the Appellate Court thought it fit to remand the matter back to the trial Court so that the parties to the suit would get proper opportunity to put forth their case. He also tried to justify the order of remand for appointment of the Commissioner and further measurement of the suit property. According to him, no prejudice would be caused to the appellants herein because of the remand order.
(3.) The present appeal from order raises the following substantial questions of law :