Page No.# 1/5 GAHC040008292023 2026:GAU-AP:598 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : SAO/1/2023 Tapi Ronya W/o Late Tapi Taley, R/o Hong Village, PO/PS Ziro, District Lower Subansiri, Arunachal Pradesh. VERSUS Tapi Tamang and 2 Ors. S/o Late Tapi Taker, R/o Hong Village, PO/PS Ziro, District Lower Subansiri, Arunachal Pradesh. 2:Tapi Rajen Age: 0 Occupation : S/o Late Tapi Haniya R/o Hong Village PO/PS Ziro District Lower Subansiri Arunachal Pradesh. 3:Tapi Tagia Age: 0 Occupation : S/o Late Tapi Taker R/o Hong Village PO/PS Ziro District Lower Subansiri Arunachal Pradesh Advocate for the Petitioner : Subu Tapin, Advocate for the Respondent : Khoda Tari, T Don,1 H Gyati,G Riba Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG Advocate for the appellants : Mr. S. Tapin, ld. Adv. Advocate for the Respondents : Mr. K. Tari, ld. Adv. for resp. Nos.1, 2 & 3. Date on which Judgment is reserved : 20.05.2026 Date of Hearing : 20.05.2026 Date of Judgment and Order : 16.06.2026 Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative part of the Judgment? :No Whether the full Judgment has been pronounced ? : Yes JUDGMENT & ORDER (CAV) Heard Mr. S. Tapin, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. K. Tari, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. 2. The present appeal under Order XLIII Rule I (U) is directed against the judgment and order dated 20.05.2022 passed by the learned District Judge, Lower Subansiri, Ziro in Title Appeal (Z) No.04/2021, whereby, the judgment and order dated 30.07.2018 passed by the learned Trial Court was set aside and the suit was remanded for fresh and proper adjudication on the legal and factual aspects of the case. 3. The main grievance of the appellants in the present second appeal is that the learned First Appellate Court, by the impugned order, instead of deciding the appeal on merits, remanded the matter to the learned Trial Court [learned Civil Judge (Sr. Page No.# 3/5 Dv.), Ziro] without recording any findings regarding the correctness or otherwise of the findings by the Trial Court. 4. The contention of the appellants is that the learned Appellate Court granted liberty to the Trial Court for adducing additional evidence and framing additional issues without first arriving at any conclusion regarding the insufficiency of the evidence on record or the inadequacy of the issues already framed by the learned Trial Court. 5. It is submitted that the First Appellate Court, under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, occupies a significant position. It is the final court with regard to facts and, therefore, it is under an obligation to independently assess the pleadings, evidence and findings recorded by the Trial Court. The power of remanding a case conferred under Order XLI of CPC is not intended to be exercised as a matter of routine. A remand order can be passed only in circumstances as provided by the provisions of law and upon recording proper reasons justifying such exercise of power. 6. On careful perusal of the judgment and order, this Court finds that the learned First Appellate Court did not undertake a complete examination of the grounds raised in the appeal. It also did not considered the findings on the material issues arising for determination. Instead, the entire matter was remanded to the Trial Court for a fresh adjudication of the legal and factual aspects of the case over and again. Such remanding of the entire matter has the effect of reopening the entire suit and thus prolonging the litigation without first determining whether the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court suffered from any infirmity warranting such remand. 7. This Court is of the considered view that before directing a complete retrial or remanding the matter, the First Appellate Court ought to have examined the evidence already available on record, considered the findings of the Trial Court and recorded its conclusion regarding the necessity of additional evidence or additional issues. In the absence of such findings, the order of remand cannot be sustained. Page No.# 4/5 8. However, upon hearing learned counsel for both the appellants and the respondents, who have fairly submitted that instead of this Court entering into the merits of the controversy, the ends of justice would be served if the appeal is restored to the file of the learned First Appellate Court for a fresh decision in accordance with law. Both the learned counsel for the parties have also jointly prayed that the existing status quo with regard to the suit land be maintained until the appeal is decided. 9. In view of the above, and taking into consideration the fair submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties, the impugned judgment and order dated 20.05.2022 passed by the learned District Judge, Lower Subansiri, Ziro in Title Appeal (Z) No.04/2021 is hereby set aside. 10. The matter is remanded to the First Appellate Court for fresh adjudication of Title Appeal (Z) No.04/2021 in accordance with law. The learned First Appellate Court shall consider and decide all the grounds raised in the appeal and pass a reasoned judgment and order strictly in terms of the provisions contained under Order XLI of CPC, without being influenced by any observation made in the impugned judgment set aside herein. 11. The parties are directed to appear before the learned First Appellate Court on 7th September, 2026’ without awaiting further notice from the said Court for further necessary orders. 12. Till disposal of the appeal by the learned First Appellate Court, the parties shall maintain status quo, as on today, in respect of the nature, character and possession of the suit land. 13. The learned First Appellate Court shall make an endeavour to dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 6 (six) months from the date of first appearance before the First Appellate Court. Page No.# 5/5 14. The second appeal stands allowed to the extent as indicated above. Send back the records immediately. JUDGE Comparing Assistant