1 2026:HHC:26981 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA FAO No. 314 of 2024 Decided on: 07.07.2026 ________________________________________________ Sohan Lal Sharma ....Appellant Versus Naresh Singh Thakur …Respondent _ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the appellant : Mr. Ashok Sood, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rajat Rana, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. B.R. Verma, Advocate. ________________________________________________ Sushil Kukreja, Judge (oral) The present appeal, under Order 43, Rule 1(u) of the Code of Civil Procedure has been preferred by the appellant, who was the defendant before the learned trial Court, against the order dated 08.08.2024, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Kinnaur at Rampur 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:26981 Bushahr, H.P., in Civil Appeal No. 37/2023, whereby judgment and decree passed by learned trial Court, wherein suit filed by the plaintiff (respondent herein) was dismissed with costs, as he could not lead any evidence despite ample opportunity, was set aside. 2. The perusal of the material available on record reveals that the plaintiff had filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 19,25,500/- against the defendant before the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge, Rampur Bushahr. However, the suit was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 27.02.2023 on the ground that “despite ample opportunity plaintiff has not proved the case as no evidence has been led, therefore suit of the plaintiff is dismissed with costs”. Feeling dissatisfied, the plaintiff preferred an appeal before the learned First Appellate Court, which was allowed and judgment and decree passed by learned trial Court was set aside and the suit was remanded to the learned trial Court with a direction to provide one opportunity to the plaintiff to lead his evidence and thereafter to proceed in accordance with law. 3 2026:HHC:26981 3. The aforesaid order has been challenged before this Court by the appellant/defendant by way of present appeal. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the respondent and have also gone through the material available on record. 5. It is admitted fact that the suit of the plaintiff has been dismissed by the learned trial Court for want of evidence vide judgment and decree dated 27.02.2023, which was challenged before the learned First Appellate Court by way of filing a Civil Appeal and learned First Appellate Court vide impugned judgment dated 08.08.2024 set aside the judgment and decree passed by learned trial Court and granted one opportunity to the plaintiff to lead evidence and remanded the case back to the learned trial Court to proceed further in accordance with law. In my opinion, the suit should have been decided on merits instead of dismissing the same for want of evidence. By restoration of the suit, the defendant will not be prejudiced, as he can always be compensated in terms of costs. 4 2026:HHC:26981 6. Hence, no interference is required in the impugned order, dated 08.08.2024, passed by learned First Appellate Court, except that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the plaintiff should be burdened with cost of Rs. 25,000/-, which shall be paid by him to the defendant. 7. It is made clear that only one opportunity shall be granted to the plaintiff to lead his entire evidence and the plaintiff shall bring the entire evidence on his own responsibility. However, the Court assistance, if required, can be given to the defendant for summoning the official witness(es), if any. Parties are directed to appear before the learned trial Court on 18.08.2026. 8. Since the suit pertains to the year 2018, the learned trial Court is directed to decide the same on or before 30th June, 2027. 9. It is made clear that payment of cost shall be a condition precedent for further prosecution of the case by the plaintiff, which shall be paid to the defendant on the very first date before the learned trial Court. 5 2026:HHC:26981 10. The appeal is disposed of accordingly, so also pending application(s), if any. Records be sent back forthwith. ( Sushil Kukreja ) 7th July, 2026 Judge (raman)