1 6669-cw-2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR O R D E R Anjani Kumar Khatod vs. Pink City Press Club Ltd. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6669/2007 under Articles 227 & 227 of the Constitution of India. Date of Order ::::::::::: December 8, 2009 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. CHAUDHARI Mr. Anjani Kumar Khatod petitioner present in person Mr. L.L.Gupta for the respondent. This writ petition has been filed against the order dated 23.7.2007 by which the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed. The plaintiff-petitioner filed appeal against the order dated 21.7.2006 passed in Execution No.27/2005 (06/2004) (Anjani Kumar Khatod vs. Pink City Press Club Ltd.) and that appeal was disposed of by order dated 7.11.2006 by the appellate Court and by that order appeal was accepted and the matter was remanded back to the trial Court. Against that order the respondent filed SB Civil Revision Petition No.198/2006 in this Court and by order dated 16.3.2007 this Court allowed the revision petition and the matter was remanded back to the 2 6669-cw-2007 appellate Court to decide the objection of the respondent about maintainability of the appeal before the appellate Court. In pursuance to this order, the learned appellate Court vide order dated 23.7.2007 dismissed the appeal. Perusal of impugned order reveals that the petitioner and the non-petitioner both the parties cited many citations, but the learned appellate Court has only mentioned in the order that citations were perused, but none of the citation has been discussed in the impugned order. Only this much has been mentioned that the petitioner submitted before the Court that in application under Section 151 C.P.C. whole execution proceedings have been dismissed, so the appeal is maintainable whereas the learned appellate Court held that no appeal is maintainable against the orders passed under Section 151 C.P.C. and only on this count the appeal was dismissed. The learned trial Court ought to have discussed the citations cited by both the parties. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that even against the dismissal of appeal no appeal is maintainable. All these points are to be considered by the appellate Court and no opinion is to be expressed by this Court at this stage. The impugned order is not a speaking order 3 6669-cw-2007 and in such circumstances, the matter should be remanded back to the appellate Court to decide the matter afresh after hearing both the parties and discussing the citations cited by both the parties. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 23.7.2009 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the learned appellate Court to decide the matter afresh by a speaking order after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties. (K.S.CHAUDHARI) J teekam/ps