Judgment : L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. 1. The 1st respondent filed O.S.No.950 of 1983 in the Court of II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal, for declaration to the effect that he is the Sajjadanashin in respect of Dargah Hazrat Masooq Rabbani at Warangal. The petitioner figured as defendant No.1 and respondents 2 to 5 as defendants 2 to 5, in the suit. After contest, the suit was dismissed, on 22.08.1991. Aggrieved by that, the 1st respondent filed A.S.No.71 of 1991 before the II Additional District Judge, Warangal. The appeal was allowed, on 10.06.1997. The petitioner filed S.A.No.847 of 1997 before this Court. The second appeal was allowed, on 04.10.2007, and the matter was remanded to the lower Appellate Court, for fresh consideration and disposal. After the remand, the 1st respondent filed I.A.No.1021 of 2004 under Order XIV Rule 5 C.P.C., with a prayer to frame an issue, viz., “Whether the plaintiff has succeeded to the office of deceased Sajjada and is entitled for a decree as prayed for?”. The petitioner opposed the I.A., by filing counter. The lower Appellate Court allowed the application, through its order, dated 18.09.2009. Hence, this revision. Heard Sri Ghanshyamdas Mandani, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri A.M. Qureshi, learned counsel for the 1st respondent and Sri Mashooq-e-Rabani, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent. The other respondents did not contest the I.A. The first appeal is being heard by the lower Appellate Court, after remand by this Court. For all practical purposes, the matter is at large, since this Court did not restrict the scope of remand. All the same, the hearing of the first appeals is strictly regulated by Order XLI C.P.C. and other relevant provisions. C.P.C., contains certain provisions which are common to suits as well as appeals. As a matter of fact, sub-section (2) of Section 107 C.P.C., mandates that the procedure that is applicable to the suits shall apply to the appeals also, subject to certain exceptions. In other words, if a separate step is contemplated or procedure is prescribed, for appeals, to that extent, the procedure that governs the suits shall stand excluded. For instance, the matter pertaining to impleading the parties is not separately dealt with under Part III of C.P.C., which relates to appeals. Therefore, one has to fall back upon Order I Rule 10 C.P.C., even to implead the parties in the appeal. For instance, the matter pertaining to impleading the parties is not separately dealt with under Part III of C.P.C., which relates to appeals. Therefore, one has to fall back upon Order I Rule 10 C.P.C., even to implead the parties in the appeal. The framing of issues under Order XIV C.P.C., constitutes an important step in the suits. The issues are to be framed on the basis of the pleadings before the trial Court and it is with reference to the issues that the parties are required to adduce evidence and address arguments. Once the suit is disposed of, and the matter lands before an appellate Court, the nature of consideration is slightly different, notwithstanding the fact that the appeal is to be treated as continuation of the suit. Irrespective of the number and nature of issues that were framed and the answer given by the trial Court, the appellate Court is placed under obligation to frame points for consideration under Rule 33 of Order XLI C.P.C. The latitude given under Rule 5 of Order XIV to amend and strike out issues is restricted up to the stage of passing the decree. Once the decree is passed, the very concept of framing of issues ceases to exist. The only circumstance, under which an appellate Court can frame issues is, when it decides to remand the matter to the trial Court, by framing an issue, which it feels is relevant, for effective adjudication of the suit. In the instant case, the appeal is pending before the lower Appellate Court, after the remand made by this Court. The occasion to frame an issue by it, does not arise. The very invocation of Order XIV Rule 5 C.P.C., by the 1st respondent in an appeal, was untenable. The C.R.P. is accordingly allowed and the order under revision is set aside. The lower Appellate Court shall endeavour to dispose of the matter within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. The miscellaneous petition filed in this civil revision petition shall also stand disposed of.