Supreme Court rules remand not required if appellate court can decide issue from existing evidence
The case concerns a dispute over the validity of a 1982 sale deed for a specific property (Item No. 5) and whether the High Court was legally justified in remanding the matter to the Trial Court for further evidence and issue framing, rather than deciding it based on the existing record.
Appellant: Shivappa (Defendant No. 2 in the original suit); Respondents: Shantavva and others (Plaintiffs in the original suit); Bench: Justice S.V.N. Bhatti.
- The Court considered the validity of the High Court's order remanding the matter to the Trial Court.
- The Court cited precedents (Ashwini Kumar K. Patel, P. Purushottam Reddy, Zarif Ahmad) stating that appellate courts should generally decide cases on the available record rather than remanding them, as remand causes delay and prejudice.
- The Court noted that the Trial Court had already recorded evidence and findings on the key issues, including possession and limitation.
- The Court observed that the High Court, as the court of first appeal, had the jurisdiction to decide the issues of fact and law itself.
Written from the document by AI, and checked against it. The original below is authoritative.
The original document
Document details
| Official title | Remand Not To Be Ordered When Appellate Court Can Decide Issue Omitted By Trial Court Based On Already Adduced Evidence : Supreme Court |
| Source body | Supreme Court of India — orders & judgments |
| Reference number | — |
| Status | closed (order) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Closing date | — |
| Documents | 1 |