IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No.1465 of 2008 Date of decision: 14th July, 2011 Raghu Nath and others … Appellants Versus Gram Panchayat Fatehabad and another … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Anil Kshetarpal, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. S.S. Dinarpur, Advocate for the respondents. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Counsel for the appellants-plaintiffs has stated that the lower appellate Court on 14th September, 2007 had passed the following order: “In pursuance of the order of this Court whereby the appellants were allowed to lead additional evidence, Sh.S.P.S. Nagla, Advocate, the learned counsel for the appellants, has tendered documents in evidence. He says that since the respondent was proceeded against exparte in the lower Court, he has no right to rebut the evidence brought on record by him. Mr.R.C. Verma, Advocate, the learned counsel for respondent No.1 has tendered documents in evidence but he has been allowed to tender the documents with the condition that they shall be read in evidence only if he convinces the Court at the time of final arguments that the respondent has the right to lead Regular Second Appeal No.1465 of 2008 document evidence at this stage. This question of law shall remain open till the matter is decided by the Court finally. Now to come up for arguments on 16.10.2007.” Learned counsel has further stated that having left the question open as to whether the documentary evidence produced by the respondent-defendant Gram Panchayat was to be taken into consideration or not, the lower appellate Court without deciding the objections raised by the appellants-plaintiffs and noted in the order dated 14th September, 2007, proceeded to rely upon these documents and had decided the appeal. Counsel for the appellants-plaintiffs has specifically stated that from a perusal of para No.9 of the judgment passed by the lower appellate Court, it is evident that these documents were taken into consideration by the Court. Mr.S.S. Dinarpur, Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents-defendants, has stated that even if these documents are not taken into consideration, still the appellants-plaintiffs have failed to prove their possession over the suit land. Be that as it may, this Court is of the opinion that it was incumbent upon the lower appellate Court to decide the objections regarding admissibility of the documents as is reflected in the order dated 14th September, 2007. Since the same has not been done, to ensure fair play the matter is remitted back to the District Judge, Yamunanagar to decide Civil Appeal No.142 of 2003 afresh within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. As a consequence of this direction, judgment dated 5th December, 2007 passed by the lower appellate Court is hereby set aside. Till the 2 Regular Second Appeal No.1465 of 2008 appeal is decided, status-quo as it exists today be maintained. The parties shall cause their appearance before the lower appellate Court on 28th July, 2011. With the observations made above, present appeal is disposed of. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE July 14, 2011 rps 3