vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.274 OF 2007 APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.274 OF 2007 APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.274 OF 2007 Jagadish Rajaram Desai ... Appellant V/s. Bapu Bhiku Ghadashi ... Respondent Mr.K.Y. Mandlik for Appellant Mr.M.B. Kale i/b K.S. Dewal for Respondent Nos.1, 2, 4b to 4d and 5 CORAM: SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. DATED: JULY 22, 2008 JULY 22, 2008 JULY 22, 2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . The main contention in respect of the impugned judgement and order is that the appeal preferred by the respondents before the District Court was in respect of the decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No.176 of 1991. Regular Civil Suit No.170 of 1995 was also heard and a decree was passed in that suit as well in favour of the appellant. However, the appeal was filed only against the decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No.176 of 1991. Yet, while deciding to remand the matter for hearing it afresh, the appellate Court has wrongly remanded the Regular Civil Suit No.170 of 1995 as well. 2. In my opinion, this contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is well founded. There was in fact no appeal filed against the decree : 2 : passed in Regular Civil Suit No.170 of 1995 and, therefore, there was no question of remanding that suit for a fresh hearing. The order of the District Judge I, Ratnagiri remanding the regular civil suit No.170 of 1995 is, therefore, set aside. The rest of the order relating to Regular Civil Suit No.176 of 1991 is not interfered with. 3. Appeal from Order is disposed of accordingly. All contentions are left open to be raised by either party before the trial Court.