DARSHAN SINGH Vs. SANTOKH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff-appellant aggrieved by the order dtd. 11/1/2023 passed by the First Appellate Court, by virtue of which the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court has been set aside and the matter has been remitted to the Trial Court with a direction to pass a judgment afresh after giving categoric findings on the additional issues framed by the First Appellate Court.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff-appellant has contended that though the First Appellate Court has the power to remand the case, however, the same is to be exercised only in a rare situation. Learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant would further contend that after framing of the additional issues the First Appellate Court could have itself recorded the evidence and decide the case on merits. It is further the contention of learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant that detailed findings had been returned by the Trial Court and without reversing the findings returned by the Trial Court the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court has simply been set aside and the matter has been remanded to the Trial Court for a decision afresh. In support of his argument, learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant has relied upon judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Zarif Ahmad (D) through LRs and Another vs. Mohd. Farooq, [2015 (1) RCR (Civil) 794] and Smt. Bachahan Devi and Anr. vs. Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur and Anr. [2008 (2) RCR (Civil) 367].

(3.) Per contra learned counsel for the caveator-defendant-respondent has contended that since the issue whether the jurisdiction of the civil court was barred was not decided, hence, the matter has rightly been remanded by the First Appellate Court. According to counsel, there is no error or illegality in the impugned order.