Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Raj Singh vs Kamlesh Devi And Others on 13 May, 2024

Author: Anil Kshetarpal

Bench: Anil Kshetarpal

                                 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:066429




SAO-9-2024(O&M)



141        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH

                                               SAO-9-2024(O&M)
                                               Date of decision : 13.05.2024

Raj Singh Sangwan                                          ...Appellant

                                         Vs.

Kamlesh Devi and others                                    ...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL

Present:   Mr. Sumit Sangwan, Advocate
           for the appellant.

           Mr. Sanjeev Kodan, Advocate and
           Mr. Gaurav Dua, Advocate
           for respondent No.1.

                        ***

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. (Oral)

1. On 19.03.2024, the following order was passed:-

"The learned counsel representing the appellant inter-alia contends that Smt. Kamlesh had purchased the suit property during the pendency of the suit. Therefore, she was governed by the rule of lispendens. He further submits that on the application of Smt. Kamlesh, she was impleaded as party and she led her evidence. Therefore, the First Appellate Court has erred in remanding the case back to the trial court without complying with the requirements of Order 41 Rule 23A CPC.
Notice of motion for 09.04.2024.
The petitioner shall have the liberty to serve the respondents through their counsel in the trial court.
Dasti only. To be listed in the urgent list."

2. Learned counsel representing the parties have been heard at 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 15-05-2024 01:49:39 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:066429 SAO-9-2024(O&M) length.

3. Learned counsel representing the respondent No.1, upon being confronted with a situation, submits that he has no objection if the First Appellate Court seeks report from the trial Court on the issues, which have been re-framed and thereafter, proceed to decide the appeal.

4. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order passed by the First Appellate Court remitting the matter back is set aside.

5. The appeal is restored to its original number. It shall be open to the First Appellate Court to seek report on the issues, which have been re-framed, from the trial Court.

6. The parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the First Appellate Court on 30.05.2024.



                                                          (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
13.05.2024                                                     JUDGE
neeraj
                Whether speaking/reasoned :         Yes          No
                Whether Reportable :                Yes          No




                                         2 of 2
                  ::: Downloaded on - 15-05-2024 01:49:40 :::