RAMESH CHAND Vs. MANDIR SHRI NAMDEV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal has been filed by the appellant-defendant challenging the order dated 5.9.11 passed by the Addl. District Judge (Fast Track) No.6, Jaipur City, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellate court') in Civil Regular Appeal No. 9/09, whereby the appellate court has set aside the judgment and decree dated 9.3.09 passed by the Addl. Civil Judge (JD) West Jaipur City, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in Civil Suit No. 12/95 and allowed the application of the respondent-plaintiff for taking additional documents on record under Order XLI Rule 27 of CPC subject to payment of cost of Rs. 2,000/-, and further directed the trial court to decide the suit afresh after granting opportunity to both the parties to produce the evidence in rebuttal in respect of the said documents.

(2.) IN the instant case it appears that the respondent-plaintiff had filed the suit seeking eviction of the appellant-defendant from the suit premises, which suit was dismissed by the trial court vide the judgment and decree dated 9.3.09. The respondent being aggrieved by the said decree had preferred the appeal before the appellate court. During the pendency of the appeal, the respondent submitted an application under Order XLI Rule 27 of CPC for taking on record certain documents. The appellate court vide the impugned order allowed the said application under Order XLI Rule 27 and remanded the case to the trial court as stated hereinabove.

(3.) AT the outset it is required to be stated that the powers of appellate court to remand the case are contained in Rule 23 and 23A of Order XLI of CPC. Rule 23 would apply in a case where the suit has been disputed of on preliminary issue, whereas Rule 23A would apply when the suit has been disposed of otherwise than on preliminary issue. The remand under Rule 25 of the said Order would be a very limited remand wherein the subordinate court can try only such issues as are referred to it for trial and having done so, the said court has to return the case to the appellate court, alongwith the evidence recorded and the findings on the issues referred to it. The Apex Court in case of P. Purushottam Reddy and Anr. Versus Pratap Steels Ltd., (2002) 2 Supreme Court Cases 686 has laid down the scope of remand in para 10 as under:-