Baban Pandurang Karad v. Laxman Keru Karad And ORS

2025:BHC-AUG:28545 59 AO 55 12.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 59 APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 55 OF 2012 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8371 OF 2025 IN AO/55/2012 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4061 OF 2012 IN AO/55/2012 BABAN PANDURANG KARAD AND OTHERS

VERSUS

LAXMAN KERU KARAD DECEASED THR LRS SITABAI LAXMAN KARAD DECEASED THR HER LRS SHIVAJI ANANDA NAGARE ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Shahaji K. Shinde Advocate for Respondent nos. 1 & 3 : Mr. Mr. A.N.Nagargoje Advocate for Applicant in CA 8371/2025 : Mr. A.N. Nagargoje Advocate for Respondent Nos. 3,4 and 5 in CA 8371/2025: Mr. Aditya N. Sikchi Advocate for Applicant in CA No. 4061/2012 : Mr. Indrajit S. Thorat ...

CORAM

: SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.

DATE : 09.10.2025 PER COURT :

Heard both sides.

2.

This appeal is directed against order dated 17.02.2012, passed by the lower Appellate Court remanding the matter to Trial Court for deciding it afresh. The parties are ad idem on the following substantial question of law:

"Whether the Lower Appellate Court is justified in remanding the matter to the Trial Court in the given facts and circumstances?"

3.

Both sides canvassed their submissions.

1/2

59 AO 55 12.odt 4.

The appellant is one of the plaintiff of Regular Civil Suit No. 61/1993 preferred for partition and possession along with respondent nos. 10 and 11. On merits, the suit was decided and it was partly decreed vide judgment dated 10.03.2000. Being aggrieved, Regular Civil Appeal No. 952/2000 was preferred by respondent nos. 1, 3 and 4. By recording elaborate findings, the Lower Appellate Court found that remand of the matter is necessary. Certain material aspect of the matter has not been gone into. 5.

I have considered the impugned order especially paragraph no. 18. I find that lower Appellate Court has applied mind judiciously. There is no need to interfere in the findings recorded by the Courts below. It would be in the interest of both parties to go for trial afresh on the points recorded by the lower Appellate Court.

6.

Its a matter of record that Regular Civil Suit No. 61/1993 has not been concluded yet. The substantive rights of the parties are involved in the matter, which needs to be addressed by extending an opportunity to them. I do not find any fault in the order of remand. 7.

Appeal from Order is dismissed. Impugned judgment and order is hereby confirmed.

9.

Parties shall appear before the Trial Court on 10.11.2025. 10.

Pending Civil Applications are disposed of.

( SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.) mkd/- 2/2