THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU C.M.A.No.1115 of 2003 ORAL JUDGMENT: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(u) of C.P.C. is directed against the judgment and decree made in A.S.No.59 of 2001 dated 12.8.2002 on the file of the learned V Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Ranga Reddy district, whereunder the judgment and decree made in O.S.No.282 of 1990 dated 5.8.1996 on the file of the learned Principal Districti Musnif, Hyderabad East and North, Ranga Reddy district decreeing the suit, was set aside and the matter was remanded to the trial Court for fresh consideration. Appellant is plaintiff and respondents are defendants. Appellant laid suit in O.S.No.282 of 1990 for registration of Shia Wakf Property and to declare him as its Muttavalli under Sections 25, 26 and 27 of Wakf Act, 1954. After full trial, the said suit was decreed as prayed for. Being aggrieved by the same, the first defendant-Wakf Board carried the matter in appeal before the learned V Additional District Judge (FTC), Ranga Reddy district in A.S.No.59 of 2001. The lower appellate Court, after perusal of the judgment of the trial Court and other material placed before it, came to the conclusion that the plaintiff had not exhausted remedies available to him under Section 25 of the Wakf Act by filing an application with particulars mentioned in the said section and inviting finding of the Wakf Board. However, during the course of arguments, on verification of unmarked documents, the lower appellate Court found the application under Section 25 of the Act, and since the same was not marked and it was not known whether the original thereof was filed with the Wakf Board since proof of service was not filed before the Court, the appellate Court held as under: “When questioned about the same, the learned counsel for the appellant conceded that such deficiency in production of the evidence is there and in case an opportunity is given to the respondent/plaintiff, he would satisfy the Court that he had exhausted the remedy under Section 25 by adducing further evidence and filing the documents. Equally so, is the performance of the appellant/respondent in leading evidence and in as much as even though they pleaded that the suit property was already registered as a Wakf property and that it does not need re-registration, they have not filed any documents proving the same and the learned counsel for the appellant also equally admitted such deficiency and he too requested the Court to afford an opportunity of leading evidence. Having regard to the fact that lot of public interest and religious sentiments are involved and without collection of further evidence, the matter cannot effectively be adjudicated, I am of the opinion that without going into the merits of the case and recording any finding, it is better that the matter should be remanded to the trial Court for fresh disposal after taking further evidence in the matter.” I am of the opinion that in view of the above findings, it cannot be said that the order passed by the lower appellate Court in remanding the matter is contrary to the provisions of Order 41, Rule 23 or 23-A of C.P.C. In fact, both the parties have agreed for remanding the matter for reconsideration on certain lacunas pointed out by the lower appellate Court. Therefore, the order passed by the lower appellate Court in remanding the matter to the trial Court for reconsideration of the entire issue cannot be said to be either arbitrary or illegal. The CMA is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the C.M.A. is dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 22.7.2010 DA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU C.M.A.No.1115 of 2003 22.7.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU C.M.A.No.1115 of 2003 Date: 22nd July, 2010 Between: Syed Hasan .. Petitioner And A.P. Wakf Board, rep. by its Secretary, Nampally, Hyderabad and another. .. Respondents