Arun Bhansali, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order dated 17.2.2014 passed by the trial court, whereby the trial court came to the conclusion that this Court by its judgment dated 7.2.2014 passed in S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 152/2013 (Smt. Saroj & Ors. v. Prabhu Narain Mathur & Anr.) had directed the trial court to deal with the matter from the stage subsequent to the order XLVII, Rule 8 CPC and decide issues No. 4, 7 & 10 after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties and pass a fresh judgment and decree.
(2.) IT is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that by the judgment dated 7.2.2014 (supra), this Court had not confined the remand to issue No. 4, 7 & 10 only and the suit as a whole was remanded back and therefore, the observations of the trial court that only issue No. 4, 7 & 10 are required to be dealt with, is ex -facie incorrect, the trial court is required to deal with the entire suit. Reliance was placed on the observations made in the case of Maji Mohan Kanwar v. State of Rajasthan: : AIR 1967 (Raj.) 264 and Umrao Singh v. The Commissioner Khudkasht, Rajasthan, Jaipur:, 1972 RLW 129, wherein it was held that once the stage under Rule 8 of Order XLVII is arrived, the original case is registered and the court rehears the same on merits and after rehearing the same, the same may either result in repetition, reversal, variation of the former decree or order. In either case since the whole matter is reheard, there is a fresh decree or order.
(3.) RELIANCE was also placed on judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in DSR Steel (P) Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: : 2012(6) SCC 782; Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Yashwant Singh Negi: : 2013(2) SCR 550; State of Rajasthan & Anr. v. Mohan Singh:, 2003(1) DNJ 402 and Anandi Prasad Dwivedi & Anr. v. State of M.P.: : 2010 ILR (MP) 1904.;