-
by sayum
04 July 2026 2:40 PM
In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court has set aside the remand order passed by the High Court, stating that it lacked justification and failed to address the findings of the Trial Court. The apex court emphasized that the power of remand must be exercised judiciously and not based solely on assumptions or without providing cogent reasons.
The bench, comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Sudhanshu Dhulia, highlighted that the High Court's remand order was passed "only on ipse dixit of the High Court sans any reason or justification." They further noted that the High Court did not reference the findings of the Trial Court or explain why those findings were not sustained or the decree needed to be reversed.
The Supreme Court clarified that the power to allow additional evidence in appeal is an exception to the general principle and can only be exercised under specific conditions. In this case, the parties did not seek permission to adduce additional evidence, and the High Court did not specify any specific evidence required for pronouncing judgment. Therefore, the provisions of Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which deal with the production of additional evidence, were found to be inapplicable.
The apex court further stressed that the sufficiency of evidence cannot be a valid ground for remand. It stated, "The Appellate Court cannot adopt the soft course of remanding the matter" solely because certain evidence that could have been produced was not. The Supreme Court emphasized that the High Court should have pronounced judgment based on the evidence already on record, in accordance with Rule 24 of Order XLI CPC.
As a result, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's impugned judgment and order, restoring the appeal for reconsideration by the High Court. The parties have been directed to appear before the High Court on March 20, 2023. No costs were awarded in the present appeal.
DATE OF DECISION: February 27, 2023
SIRAJUDHEEN vs ZEENATH & ORS.
