Remanding case back to trial without reversing limitation?

the appealte court has directed to take addditional evidance in the   matter and there is no error as such,it is advisable to let the addtional evidance be recorded and refute that as you state  they failed to explain the delay, There ground in the appeal appears paryer for allowing of  additional evidance in the matter; 

Once the appellate court decided, you can only defend in the lower court and once again counter the additional evidence.  Limitation period is an issue of fact and law and only after the proper trial the court after taking additional evidence into consideration has to decide the issue

Ex: A might have filed some forged documents and succeeded in obtaining the property.  Later the plaintiff might have obtained concrete evidence that it was a fraud and the case was vitiated with fake and fraudulent documents.  The limitation period commences from the time when the party discovered such a material document/fact of fraud.  A person may discover the fact/document basing on which some rights were acquired after 100 years, still, if he can establish that the transaction was vitiated by fraud it can be challenged in any court either in original or appellate proceedings and even in collateral.  The limitation period commences from the date of discovery of such a document in case of fraud.

The matter could be taken up in second appeal in the High Court if the decision of the Appellate court is errroneous and involves substantial question of Law.

1. Court/s are vested with absolute discretion to condone /set aside ANY delay on ANY ground.

2. Mere recording plea /reasons /findings is not an speaking order and has no implications on the case. Delay condonation has to be accepted or rejected, before proceedings the matter.

Keep Smiling .... Hemant Agarwal
VISIT: www.chshelpforum.com

Absolutely, it needs to be rejected or accepted before proceeding. But here in our case first appellate court has remanded the matter without reversing the findings of limitation. To be precise first appellate court in its order has nor even touched the issue of limitation. How can court skip this crucial issue? First appellate court must disagree with the finding of trial court before remitting the matter, isn't it?

Originally posted by : Hemant Agarwal
	1. Court/s are vested with absolute discretion to condone /set aside ANY delay on ANY ground. 2. Mere recording plea /reasons /findings is not an speaking order and has no implications on the case. Delay condonation has to be accepted or rejected, before proceedings the matter. Keep Smiling .... Hemant Agarwal VISIT: www.chshelpforum.com

Absolutely, it needs to be rejected or accepted before proceeding. But here in our case first appellate court has remanded the matter without reversing the findings of limitation. To be precise first appellate court in its order has nor even touched the issue of limitation. How can court skip this crucial issue? First appellate court must disagree with the finding of trial court before remitting the matter, isn't it?

Originally posted by : G.L.N. Prasad
	Once the appellate court decided, you can only defend in the lower court and once again counter the additional evidence.  Limitation period is an issue of fact and law and only after the proper trial the court after taking additional evidence into consideration has to decide the issue Ex: A might have filed some forged documents and succeeded in obtaining the property.  Later the plaintiff might have obtained concrete evidence that it was a fraud and the case was vitiated with fake and fraudulent documents.  The limitation period commences from the time when the party discovered such a material document/fact of fraud.  A person may discover the fact/document basing on which some rights were acquired after 100 years, still, if he can establish that the transaction was vitiated by fraud it can be challenged in any court either in original or appellate proceedings and even in collateral.  The limitation period commences from the date of discovery of such a document in case of fraud.

Okay, so lets assume plaintiff says that some specific contract was executed between plaintiff and defendant which he never excercised. Can he institute suit after 20 years praying relief of specific performance?
And lets assume that the suit was instituted and trial commenced but later in the judgement of trial it is recorded that the reason for the aforesaid delay in filing suit was a false and was deliberately done by the plaintiff to bring his suit under limitation. Can this thing be ignored?

Guidance can not be given on assumptions.  The simple query is on the limitation period.  It was replied that the limitation period depends on facts and law, and if it is fraud, within 3 years from discovering the fraudulent document or knowledge of the fraud.  This issue can only be decided by Court after due trial.  No experts can further guide on a decided case without studying the facts and when there is appeal pending with documentary evidence, as the advocate that is handling case is well versed.

Originally posted by : G.L.N. Prasad
	Guidance can not be given on assumptions.  The simple query is on the limitation period.  It was replied that the limitation period depends on facts and law, and if it is fraud, within 3 years from discovering the fraudulent document or knowledge of the fraud.  This issue can only be decided by Court after due trial.  No experts can further guide on a decided case without studying the facts and when there is appeal pending with documentary evidence, as the advocate that is handling case is well versed.

Can I send you private msg explaining detailed facts and law points of the case am talking about? May be you can suggest us some remedy.

The object of the forum is to learn and share knowledge while giving necessary guidance.  Members seeking guidance through private messages can only their purpose and may not be the proper way.  When the quey and guidance are through the forum, there is more scope on such correction by experts.  Private messages are not advisable unless the information is confidential in nature and posting in an open forum may be detrimental to the member's interest.  In several such forums, private messages are against the discipline of the forum.  Please kindly read the entire guidance of all replies..

Originally posted by : G.L.N. Prasad
	The object of the forum is to learn and share knowledge while giving necessary guidance.  Members seeking guidance through private messages can only their purpose and may not be the proper way.  When the quey and guidance are through the forum, there is more scope on such correction by experts.  Private messages are not advisable unless the information is confidential in nature and posting in an open forum may be detrimental to the member's interest.  In several such forums, private messages are against the discipline of the forum.  Please kindly read the entire guidance of all replies..

My question is simple that the powers given to the appellate court under Order 41 rule 23 are limited. And the appellate court must disagree with the findings of trial court before remanding the matter specially the findings of limitation. Here in our case appellate has not even touched the issue of limitation in its remand order.

Once it is remanded, the presumption is that they have not studied the case, and basing on such an appeal petition that the lower court has not gone into entire facts and law, it has remanded back, without considering other factors considered in a lower court judgment.  The appeal is still open for HC.  It is HC that has found that lower court has not taken consideration of all the facts and as such remanded to the trial court.  It is HC well-considered decision basing on such a petition.   HC has not given the final verdict on a lower court judgment.