S.A.O.No.26 of 2008 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
S.A.O.No.26 of 2008
Date of Order: 20.10.2008
Jai Kishan Kaushal
...Appellant
Versus
Mohinder Kapil
..Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA
Present: Mr. Suresh Goyal, Advocate
for the appellant
RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral).
The appellant challenges the order dated 22.09.2008 passed by
Additional District Judge, Barnala, accepting the appeal filed by the
respodnent and setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the Civil
Judge (Junior Division), Barnala, dated 03.04.2001 and remanding the
case to the trial Court for adjudication aftresh, after grant of a reasonable
opportunity to the respondent to produce evidence.
Counsel for the appellant submits that, the respondent was
granted three opportunities to lead evidence during the trial. The first
appellate court should, therefore, have decided the appeal on merits
instead of remanding it for adjudication afresh.
I have heard counsel for the appellants and perused the
impugned order.
I find no reason whether in fact or of law to interfere with the
impugned order. The Additional District Judge, Barnala accepted the
appeal and set aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court, as
adequate opportunity was not granted by the trial Court. The discretion
S.A.O.No.26 of 2008 -2-
exercised by the first appellate court is neither perverse nor arbitrary as
grant of a reasonable opportunity is the sine qua non of a judicial
adjudication. The impugned order does not suffer from any error whether
in fact or of law. As a result the appeal is dismissed.
However, the trial court is directed to make every endeavour to
decide the suit within four months.
October 20, 2008 (RAJIVE BHALLA) nt JUDGE