Dinesh vs Ghisia
2023 Latest Caselaw 7514 MP

                                                                   1
                                        IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                           AT JABALPUR
                                                                BEFORE
                                                  HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                                           ON THE 9 th OF MAY, 2023
                                                        MISC. APPEAL No. 6088 of 2022

                                       BETWEEN:-
                                       1.    DINESH S/O LATE BHAIYALAL, AGED ABOUT 36
                                             YEAR S, R/O DEOTHAN, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
                                             BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       2.    PHOOLCHAND S/O LATE BHAIYALAL, AGED
                                             ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O DEOTHAN, TEHSIL AND
                                             DISTRICT BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       3.    ARUNA W/O KAILASH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
                                             R/O VILLAGE SELGAON, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
                                             BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       4.    GAJRA W/O BANWARI, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
                                             R/O VILLAGE KHARI, TEHSIL BHAINSDEHI
                                             (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       5.    TULSA W/O RAMDAYAL, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
                                             R/O VILLAGE BHEEMPUR, TEHSIL BHAINSDEHI
                                             (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       6.    GEETA W/O SHANKAR D/O LATE BHAIYALAL,
                                             AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE KHARI,
                                             TEHSIL BHAINSDEHI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       7.    RAMRATI W/O LATE BHAIYALAL, AGED ABOUT 60
                                             YEAR S, R/O DEOTHAN, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
                                             BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....APPELLANTS
                                       (BY SHRI JAIDEEP SIRPURKAR - ADVOCATE)

                                       AND
                                       1.    GHISIA W/O LATE SUNDERLAL, AGED ABOUT 52
Signature Not Verified
  SAN                                        YEAR S, R/O DEOTHAN TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
                                             BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)
Digitally signed by VAIBHAV YEOLEKAR
Date: 2023.05.13 11:30:59 IST


                                       2.    SHANKAR S/O LATE SUNDER LAL, AGED ABOUT
                                                                      2
                                             45 YEARS, R/O DEOTHAN, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
                                             BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       3.    GOKUL S/O LATE SUNDER LAL, AGED ABOUT 35
                                             YEAR S, R/O DEOTHAN, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
                                             BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       4.    BABLU S/O LATE DHANRAJ, AGED ABOUT 36
                                             YEAR S, R/O DEOTHAN, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
                                             BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       5.    ASHU S/O LATE KALLU, AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS,
                                             OCCUPATION: THROUGH LEGAL GUARDIAN
                                             SHEETAL R/O DEOTHAN, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
                                             BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       6.    MANISH S/O LATE KALLU, AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS,
                                             R/O DEOTHAN, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT BETUL
                                             (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       7.    SHEETAL S/O LATE KALLU, AGED ABOUT 10
                                             YEAR S, R/O DEOTHAN, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
                                             BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       8.    JAGANNATH S/O LATE GENDU, AGED ABOUT 48
                                             YEAR S, R/O DEOTHAN, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
                                             BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       9.    DURGESH S/O LATE GENDU, AGED ABOUT 22
                                             YEAR S, R/O DEOTHAN, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
                                             BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       10.   RUPESH S/O LATE GENDU, AGED ABOUT 20
                                             YEAR S, R/O DEOTHAN, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
                                             BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                    .....RESPONDENTS
                                       (NONE FOR THE RESPONDENTS)

                                             This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                                       following:
                                                                          ORDER

No one appears for the respondents though names of counsel are Signature Not Verified SAN

mentioned in the cause list.

Digitally signed by VAIBHAV YEOLEKAR Date: 2023.05.13 11:30:59 IST This Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the plaintiffs being aggrieved by the

order of remand passed by the Additional Judge to the First Additional District Judge, Betul in RCA No. 53/2017 wherein vide judgment dated 17/11/2022, the wholesale remand has been made without framing any issues.

Shri Jaideep Sirpurkar submits that while allowing an application under Order 41 Rule 27, matter has been remanded whereas it was incumbent upon the appellate court to have decided the appeal on the basis of additional evidence which was produced on record and there was no need for wholesale remand.

It is submitted that such issue of wholesale remand has been deprecated by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Vipin Kumar and others Vs Sarojani 2013 (1) MPLJ 480.

When the facts of the present case are examined in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Coordinate Bench in Vipin Kumar (supra), then the said order of remand cannot be given seal of approval.

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 17/11/2022 is quashed. Matter is remanded to the learned Additional District Judge to decide the appeal on its own merits.

In above terms, the appeal is disposed of.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE vy

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by VAIBHAV YEOLEKAR Date: 2023.05.13 11:30:59 IST