Parasram (Died) Through Legal Heir vs Ratan Singh
2025 Latest Caselaw 3762 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Parasram (Died) Through Legal Heir vs Ratan Singh on 28 August, 2025

                                                       1/3




                           HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                               SA No. 375 of 2010

                      Parasram (died) through Legal Heir versus Ratan Singh & Others


                                                  Order Sheet



                    28.08.2025           Mr. Prakash Tiwari, counsel for the appellant.

                                         Mr. Parag Kotecha, counsel for Lrs. of respondent

After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant

on admission, the point wrapped out from the record is

that on the first round of litigation the trial Court vide its

judgment and decree dated 28.02.2002 has decreed the

suit and the trial Court while deciding the issue No. 4 has

categorically given its finding that the suit is within

limitation and also recorded its finding that if the property

is joint property then there will be no question of limitation

will be exists. Against that present appellant has preferred

Digitally signed by MANISH MANISH YADAV YADAV Date:

2025.08.29 11:48:43 +0530

a first appeal bearing appeal No. 7-A/2003 which has

been decided on 27.11.2004. The learned first appellate

Court has framed as many as 3 issues for its

determination:

1) Whether application for taking document under Order

41 Rule 27 of CPC can be allowed?

2) Whether the trial Court has assigned the reasons for

condoning the delay?

3) Whether the trial Court has passed the judgment and

decree by wrong considering the facts?

But while allowing the appeal has only taken into

consideration that the application filed by the appellant

under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC was remitted back for

deciding the case afresh on the basis of allowing the

application under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC. Prima-facie,

it seems that the first appellate Court has affirmed the

finding of limitation issues.

Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently

submits that by the order of remand, it is quite vivid that

its a absolute remand.

Let the counsel for the appellant address on this

Court from the perusal of 9 whether it is absolute remand

or only to the extent of allowing the application under

Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC. It is also directed that the

appellant shall clarify legal provisions in this regard on the

next date of hearing positively.

List this case on 12th September, 2025 in the fresh

matter list.

Sd/-

(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

t

Manish