Madras High Court
J.Kandasamy vs A.Seerajunisha @ Suganya on 23 June, 2025
Author: T.V.Thamilselvi
Bench: T.V.Thamilselvi
CMA No. 889 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23-06-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
CMA No. 889 of 2023 & CMA NO. 936 OF 2023
AND
CMP NO. 8250 OF 2023 & CMP NO. 8583 OF 2023
J.Kandasamy
Appellant in both
C.M.A.s
Vs
1. A.Seerajunisha @ Suganya
2.A.Senthilkumar
Respondents in both
C.M.A.s
CMA No. 889 of 2023
PRAYER:-Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Order 43 Rule 1 (u) of Civil
Procedure Code, praying to set aside the judgment and decree of the Principal
District Judge, Erode in AS No.44 of 2019 dated 31.01.2023 reversing the
Judgment and Decree passed by the II Additional Sub court, Erode in OS
No.146 of 2012 dated 25.01.2019 and remanding the case to the trial court
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 03:45:37 pm )
CMA No. 889 of 2023
CMA No. 936 of 2023
PRAYER:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Order 43 Rule 1(u) of Civil
Procedure Code, praying to set aside the Judgment and Decree of the Principal
District Judge, Erode in AS No.45/2019 dt. 31.01.2023 reversing the Judgment
and decree passed by the II Additional Sub Court, Erode in OS No.26/2017 dt.
25.01.2019 and remanding the case to the trial court
For Appellant in Mr.S. Kaithamalai Kumaran
both C.M.A.s:
For Respondents in Mr J.Titus Enock For R1
both C.M.A.s: R2 - Exparte
JUDGMENT
Challenging the impugned orders of remand passed in A.S.Nos.44 and 45
of 2019 dated 31.01.2023 respectively reversing the judgment and decree
passed by II Addl. Sub-Court, Erode in O.S.Nos.146 of 2012 and 26 of 2017
dated 25.01.2019 respectively, the appellant preferred these Civil Miscellaneous
Appeals.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 03:45:37 pm )
2. The learned counsel for appellant argues that the first appellate judge
has committed an error in making order of remand to the trial court for fresh
consideration by recasting the issue without taking note of the fact that already
all those issues were framed by the trial court and the same were decided by the
trial judge by considering the evidence on record. Therefore, the orders of
remand is unwarranted and prayed to set aside the findings of first appellate
judge.
3. The learned counsel for 1st respondent argues that at the time of
arguments, before the first appellate court, the 1st defendant has submitted the
defence, considering the same, the first appellate judge has recasted the issue as
such is justifiable one, which needs no interference.
4. Considering both side submissions and on perusal of records, before
the trial court, the trial judge has framed eight issues and on hearing both sides,
and considering the evidence, the suits were decreed and the same were
challenged by 1st respondent before the first appellate court in A.S.Nos.44 & 45
of 2019 on the file of Principal District Judge, Erode. At the time of argument,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 03:45:37 pm )
the learned judge has held that the issues ought to have been recasted and he
had also recasted the issues with a direction to remand back the matters to the
trial court for fresh consideration. But, on considering the issues framed by the
first appellate judge, it is ascertained that those are one and the same and all the
recasted issues framed by the learned judge was already decided. Considering
the defence of 1st defendant, the first appellate judge recasted the issue “whether
the power of attorney and suit sale agreement are executed only for the purpose
of loan transaction?” Issues recasted to prove those aspects. But on considering
the issues framed by the trial court, the fourth issue framed by the trial judge is
also one and the same. Therefore, already those issues were framed and to that
effect, the evidence also adduced and the same has also been considered by the
trial judge on merits. For remanding back the matters to the trial court to decide
the same issue is unwarranted one as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel
for appellant. Therefore, the orders of remand made by the first appellate court
in A.S.Nos.44 and 45 of 2019 are set aside and the first appellate judge is
directed to decide the appeal on merits without influence of earlier observation
made by the first appellate judge.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 03:45:37 pm )
5. With the aforesaid observation, these Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are
disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected Civil Miscellaneous
Petitions are closed.
23-06-2025
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Internet:Yes
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
rpp
To
1. Principal District Judge, Erode.
2. II Addl. Sub-Court, Erode.
3. Section Officer, VR Section, Madras High Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 03:45:37 pm )
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 03:45:37 pm )
T.V.THAMILSELVI J.
rpp
CMA Nos. 889 & 936 of
AND CMP NOS. 8250 &
8583 OF 2023
23-06-2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 03:45:37 pm )
