IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. RSA Nos.222 and 228 of 1995. Date of decision : 04.07.2008. 1. RSA No.222 of 1995. Sukar & Another ….Appellants Versus Atma Ram & Others ….Respondents 2. RSA No.228 of 1995. Sukar & another ….Appellants Versus Ram Sarup & Others ….Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellants: Mr.Bimal Gupta, Advocate. For respondent No.1: Mr.Bhupender Gupta, Senior in RSA 222/95 and Advocate with Ms.Charu Gupta, 5 in RSA 228/1995. Advocate. For Respondents 3 & 4: Ms.Ruma Kaushik, Additional Advocate General. Dev Darshan Sud, J. These two appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment as they involve the same set of facts. Without entering into the merits of the controversy raised on the points of law urged, a reading of the judgment of the learned District Judge shows that he has held that the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred in view of the decision of Chuhniya Devi vs. Jindu Ram, (1991)1 Shim.L.C. 223. This part of the judgment cannot 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers are allowed to see the judgment? be sustained as it is by now well settled that merely because the question of tenancy is raised, the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts is not ousted. On the other issues, I find that both the Courts below have been very cursory in dealing with the aspect regarding the Will of late Shri Munshi Ram which was executed in favour of Atma Ram, proforma respondent No.4 and was the subject matter of adjudication in judgment exhibited as Ex.DY-1. The learned trial Court has clubbed 4 issues deciding the issue of tenancy and validity of Will in one stroke. The learned appellate Court was right in observing that these could not be clubbed as the findings on the issues were incomplete and jumbled up. In this state of uncertainty which has also been left obscure by the learned appellate Court, this is a fit case where the case needs to be remanded for decision afresh on the evidence on record. In view of this un-certainty, both these appeals are remanded to the learned District Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan who will rehear the appeals on the points urged before it. The question of jurisdiction of the Civil Court shall not be decided as I have held that the Civil Court has jurisdiction. Parties to appear before the learned District Judge on 5th August, 2008. These appeals pertained to the year 1995, the learned District Judge shall dispose them of not later than 31st December, 2008. He shall ensure that those of the respondents who are not present, are properly represented for which purpose notice shall be issued to them. July 4, 2008 (Dev Darshan Sud) (aks) Judge.