1 AO NO.145 OF 2009 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 145/2009 \ [Civil] With CA/12753/2009 In AO/145/2009 (Chatrapati Shivaji Vachanalay and another Vs. Raosaheb Purushottam Desale (Patil) -------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Mr. S.P.Deshmukh, Adv., h/f Mrs. C.S.Deshmukh, Adv., for the appellant. Mr. Shrikant S.Patil, Adv., for respondent/sole. ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE:10-12-2010 1. The remand of the suit is questioned by the original defendants. The learned first appellate Court while deciding the appeal on 27.8.2009, did not answer the controversy between the parties; only on a basic objection as to non impleading of the trustees of the appellant, he has sent back the suit which was already dismissed on 29.7.2005. The observations of the learned Judge, certainly calls for interference as he has, without any occasion, referred convenience 2 AO NO.145 OF 2009 of the parties is required to be seen, oblivious to the fact that it is inconvenient to the appellant – the trust and that has not been looked into. The order under challenge being contrary to the settled position, the same calls for interference and, accordingly the impugned order is set aside. The learned District Judge, Dhule, shall decide R.C.A. No.90/2005, afresh, on all the points. Both the parties to address all the controversies between them. No costs. The appeal to be expeditiously heard after the parties causing their appearance which the parties shall be doing on 20th Jan.,2011. Civil Application disposed of. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE ... AGP/145-09ao