IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 6259 of 2008 Date of decision: 4.3.2009 Mahant Kapil Dev ...Petitioner Versus Smt. Parkash Wati and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr. Sumeet Mahajan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sham Lal Bhalla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.L.Sarin, Senior Advocate with Ms. Seema Jaspal, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2. S.D.ANAND, J. The impugned order cannot, by any stretch of interpretation, be said to be indicative of proper application of mind to the controversy in issue at the hands of the learned Trial Court. The entire order, except the concluding para, quotes the respective pleadings and also contentions of the parties. It is only in the course of concluding para that the learned Trial Court recorded that “I have come to this conclusion that it is necessary for the purpose of determining the real question of controversy between the parties” It would, thus, be just and appropriate to remand the matter for a decision afresh at the hands of the learned Trial Court which shall notice “the real question of controversy between the parties” and, then, proceed to record a finding either way. It will also notice the basis of observation that “it will not change the nature of the suit”. The parties, through their learned counsel, are directed to appear before the learned Trial Court on 9.3.2009. The learned Trial Court shall dispose of the plea afresh within a fortnight from the date fixed i.e. 9.3.2009. Disposed of accordingly. March 04, 2009 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge