IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CASE NO.: S.A.O. 26 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION : July 3,2009 Ajit Singh .......Appellant versus Vijay Kumar ......Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR PRESENT: Mr. Karanjit Singh, Advocate for the appellant. NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. This is a Second Appeal against the order dated 09-03-2009 passed by District Judge, Amritsar vide which the order of Civil judge (Jr. Divn.) Amritsar dated 03-06-2008 was set aside and the suit was remanded back to the trial Court for afresh decision. The suit for specific performance was filed in the Court on 07-12-2007. The suit was decreed. The present appellant filed an appeal before the Appellate Court. The appeal was allowed on the ground that a suit property of suit property drawn to scale had not been filed by the respondent before the trial Court and hence, the same is in violation of the provisions of Volume-I Chapter-I Part-C Order 9(11) of Rules and Orders of this Court which ensure that every plaint shall be accompanied by Jamabandi and where the suit is for specific plot with definite boundaries, it should be accompanied by a map, drawn to scale, showing clearly the specific plot claimed or in relation to which the decree is to be made, and so much of the fields, adjoining it also S.A.O. 26 of 2009 -2- drawn to scale, as may be sufficient to facilitate identification. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial Court should have rejected the plaint and the District Judge, Amritsar had although rightly accepted the appeal, erred in remanding back the suit to the trial Court for the same. He has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court, reported in the case of Nahar Singh vs. Harnek Singh and others 1997(1), Apex Court Journal 417. In fact, on the basis of this judgment, the District Judge, Amritsar rightly set aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court. The Appellate Court rightly held that to dismiss the plaint outright may not be proper in the facts of the present case as admittedly according to the title of the plaint, as also, the agreement of sale in dispute, the suit property does not bear khasra numbers. In para 8 of the judgment of the Appellate Court, it is duly recorded that the learned counsel for the respondent fairly conceded that the same is located within red line of the village and the same does not bear any khasra numbers. In such a situation, where, admittedly, there is no khasra numbers but the location of the plot is admitted, it would not be fair to deny the opportunity to the respondent to place on record the site plan of the suit property drawn to scale. In view of the above, I find no reason to interfere with the judgment dated 09-03-2009 passed by District Judge, Amritsar, remanding the case to the trial Court for afresh decision which has been passed, keeping in the mind the provisions of Volume-I Chapter-I Part-C S.A.O. 26 of 2009 -3- Order 9(11) of Rules and Orders of this Court and the law laid down in the case of Nahar Singh (supra). The S.A.O. Is, accordingly, dismissed. (NIRMALJIT KAUR) JUDGE July 3, 2009 gurpreet Whether to be referred to the Reporter : Yes / No