S.B.CIVIL SECOND APPEAL NO. 487/2007 Gulab Chand and others Versus. Babu and others. 25/08/2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK PARIHAR. Mr. RK Mathur, for the appellants. Mr. Deepak Saini on behalf of Mr. Praveen Balwada, for the respondents. Suit for permanent injunction filed by the plaintiffs- appellants was dismissed by the trial court vide judgment and decree dated 08/04/2003. The above judgment and decree passed by the trial court has further been affirmed by the lower appellate court vide judgment and decree dated 05/04/2007. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs-appellants has however submitted that during the course of pendency of the appeal, the plaintiffs-appellants had filed an application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC before the lower appellate court along with a judgment of Civil Court in regard to the same land in question holding the same as open space. It has been submitted that in spite of opportunities been given, no reply to the application has been filed on behalf of the defendants-respondents before the lower appellate court. However, lower appellate court neither decided the application nor any observations whatsoever were made on the application or documents placed by the plaintiffs- appellants on record. After hearing counsel for the parties, I have carefully gone through the material on record. As alleged by the plaintiffs-appellants, the dispute in regard to the land in question has already been decided by the Civil Court way back in the year 1947 itself. The lower appellate court ought to have considered the application filed on behalf of the plaintiffs-appellants under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC. Accordingly, without making any observations on merits, the matter is remanded back to the lower appellate court to decide the application filed on behalf of the plaintiffs- appellants under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC after giving opportunity of hearing to both the sides and further deciding the appeal afresh in accordance with law. The record be sent back to the lower appellate court immediately. Since the matter is pending before the courts below for last more than a decade, it is expected from the lower appellate court to decide the appeal as expeditiously as possible. With the above observations and directions, the appeal is disposed of accordingly. (Ashok Parihar), J.