IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No. 2944 of 2009(O&M) Date of Decision: November 14, 2011. Municipal Council, Palwal ...... APPELLANT Versus Dr. Poonam Dhariwal and others. ...... RESPONDENTS CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. R.S. Kundu, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Sudhir Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent No.1. None for respondents No.2 to 4. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present regular second appeal has been filed against judgment and decree dated 16.01.2009 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Faridabad dismissing appeal filed by the present appellant-defendant against judgment and decree dated 03.10.2007 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Palwal vide which suit filed by respondent-plaintiff was decreed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully including both the judgments passed by learned courts below. RSA No.2944 of 2009. The only point argued by the learned counsel for the appellant- defendant is that the appellant-defendant had filed an application for additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‘CPC’) and however, the said application remained undecided. It has been contended that the application was not decided while passing the impugned judgment by learned Additional District Judge, Faridabad. Hence, it is contended that the impugned judgment dated 16.01.2009 cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and the case is required to be remanded for fresh decision along with the decision on application filed under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC. It has been fairly conceded by the learned counsel for respondent No.1-plaintiff that the application filed under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC by the present appellant, remained undecided. Hence, in view of these facts, the present appeal is accepted. The impugned judgment and decree passed by learned Additional District Judge, Faridabad is set aside. The case is remanded to learned Additional District Judge, Palwal, with a direction that the appeal filed by present appellant-defendant along with the application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC be decided afresh after hearing both the parties. Both the parties are directed to appear before learned Additional District Judge, Palwal, on 16.12.2011. However, learned Additional District Judge, Palwal, is directed to make efforts to decide this appeal expeditiously as the present litigation is pending since 1999. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) November 14, 2011. JUDGE Sachin M. 2 RSA No.2944 of 2009. 3