1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA FAO No. 262 of 2007 Date of decision: 22nd July, 2011. __________________________________________________________ Jagmohan Singh and others. ….Appellant. Versus Kanshi Ram and others. ….Respondents. ._________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Appellant : Mr. Karan Singh Kanwar, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. G.D. Verma, Senior Advocate with Mr. B.C. Verma, Advocate, for respondent No.1 to 3. Mr. P.K. Sharma, Addl. A.G. with Ms. Shubh Mahajan, Advocate, for respondent No.5 and 6. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, J. (Oral) The appellant is aggrieved by the order of whole sale remand passed by the learned Appellate Court. I am not entering into the controversy of the entire facts but only those which are required for the purpose of adjudication of the present appeal. The learned Appellate Court on the pleadings/application filed before it holds that the learned trial Court chooses to ignore the specific stand taken by defendants No.4 to 9 before it. According to the learned Appellate Court, on the pleadings, which went to the root of the case, issues should have been framed/settled. The learned Appellate Court further observes that the findings of the trial Court that these pleadings are already covered by 1 Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 the issues which have been settled earlier were not correct since those issues were settled prior to the filing of the written statement by defendants No.4 to 9. In these circumstances, additional issues as detailed in para 16 of the Judgment of the learned Appellate Court have been framed and the case has been remanded for trial afresh. 2. It is by now well settled that the whole sale remand is to be avoided, more especially when learned Appellate can either settle additional issues itself or call for findings on these issues. 3. In case, learned Appellate Court was of the opinion that these issues are required for trial, the method for that was to direct the learned trial Court to give findings on these issues and call for the evidence, if consider necessary and record evidence on these issues. In these circumstances, the order passed by the learned Appellate Court remanding the case for trial afresh is quashed and set aside and it is directed: (1) that the appeal shall be re-admitted on the record of the learned District Judge, Sirmour at Nahan, who has to proceed with the trial afresh in accordance with law. (2) learned District Judge shall direct the learned trial Court to record the evidence/ findings on the issues as framed iby the Appellate Court and call for such findings before it will then proceed further with the appeal. (3) learned District Judge shall fix a date on which the parties shall appear before the learned trial Court and the learned trial Court shall proceed to record evidence on the settled issues. 3 (4) that the parties to this appeal shall be given an adequate opportunity to lead evidence in support of the issues settled by the learned Appellate Court. (5) that the findings recorded by the learned trial Court on these issues shall be forwarded to the learned District Judge, who shall thereafter proceed further with the appeal. (6) the parties are directed to appear before the learned District Judge, Sirmour at Nahan on 21.09.2011. 4. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. All the miscellaneous applications are also disposed of. Record of the learned Appellate Court be sent back immediately. 22nd July, 2011 (Dev Darshan Sud), (jai) Judge