JUDGMENT 1. - With the consent of the parties, the matter has been heard finally. 2. This appeal under Order 43, Rule 1 (u) CPC has been filed by the defendants aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 19.11.2011 passed by Additional District Judge, Bhinmal, District Jalore, whereby the first appeal filed by the plaintiff against the judgment and decree dated 26.5.2010 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr.Div.), Bhinmal has been set-aside and the matter has been remanded back to the trial court for re-deciding the suit on merits. 3. The facts in brief are that the defendants filed a suit for specific performance regarding land comprised in Araji Khasara No.137 & 237 ad measuring in all 45 Bighas 10 Biswa, which was2 resisted by the defendants and the learned trial court after framing issues and evidence having been led by the parties dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff. 4. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 26.5.2010, regular first appeal was filed under Section 96 CPC. 5. The defendants filed cross-objections under Order 41, Rule 22 CPC regarding finding on Issues No.6, 7 & 8 and partly against the Issue No.4. The learned First Appellate Court after hearing the parties came to the conclusion that the findings on Issues No.1, 2, 3 & 9 were required to be set-aside and it was of the further opinion that one additional issue 'In case the plaintiff is not found entitled for specific performance, to what relief he is entitled?' was also framed. 6. The learned First Appellate Court passed the following operative order:- " vr% vihykFkhZ@oknh x.kirflag }kjk izLrqr ;g vihy o dzkWl&vkCtsD'ku vkaf'kd :i ls Lohdkj dh tkdj] flfoy U;k;k/kh'k ( ofj"B [k.M ) Hkhueky }kjk fnukad 26-5-2010 dks ikfjr fu.kZ; o vKkfIr dks vikLr fd;k tkrk gS ,oa vc bl izdj.k dks iqu% izfrizsf"kr@fjek.M dj mUgsa funsZ'k fn, tkrs gS fd os fu.kZ; esa mYysf[kr fcUnqvksa ij i{kdkjku~ dks lquokbZ dk i;kZIr volj nsus ds mijkUr rudh la[;k 1] 2] 3] 9 ,oa mijksDr vfrfjDr fufeZr rudh dk fof/k vuqlkj fuLrkj.k djsA nksuksa i{k vkxkeh dk;Zokgh gsrq v/khuLFk U;k;ky; ds le{k fnukad 12-12-2011 dks mifLFkr jgsA bl vihy ds O;; ckcr~ dksbZ vkns'k ugha gSA " 7. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the order passed by the learned First Appellate Court is ex-facie beyond the scope of Order 41, Rule 23 CPC and the same,3 therefore, deserves to be quashed and set-aside. It was submitted that besides the fact that the learned First Appellate Court very cursorily dealt with the findings on Issues No.1, 2, 3 & 9 and reversed the same and thereafter remanded back the matter to the learned trial court. It was submitted that admittedly the learned First Appellate Court has neither felt any requirement nor passed any direction to take further evidence oral or documentary and the learned trial court has simply been directed to pass a fresh judgment, which is not permissible in law. Ultimately, it is prayed that the order impugned passed by the learned First Appellate Court deserves to be quashed and set-aside. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent though supported the finding of the learned First Appellate Court in so far as reversing the findings of the learned trial court on Issues No.1, 2, 3 & 9 are concerned, it is submitted that the Court having come to the said conclusion on the above issues should have decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff and there was, in fact, no occasion to remand back the case. 9. I have considered the rival submissions made at the Bar. 10. The provisions of Order 41, Rule 23 and 23A CPC for remand can ordinarily be invoked only in a case where the suit has been decided by the learned trial court upon a preliminary point and the decree is reversed in appeal and it is felt necessary by the learned First Appellate court that further issues are required to be dealt with by the learned trial court, in that case the matter can be remanded. The other circumstance is taken care of by the provisions of Order 41, Rule 23A CPC, whereby, the Court comes to the conclusion while reversing the order in appeal that a retrial is necessary then in that case it can remand back the matter. However, the learned First Appellate Court has apparently wholly ignored the provisions of Order 41, Rule 24 CPC, which reads as under:- "24. However, the learned First Appellate Court has apparently wholly ignored the provisions of Order 41, Rule 24 CPC, which reads as under:- "24. Where evidence on record sufficient, Appellate Court may determine case finally.- Where the evidence upon the record is sufficient to enable the Appellate Court to pronounce judgment, the Appellate Court may, after resettling the issues, if necessary, finally determine the suit, notwithstanding that the judgment of the Court from whose decree the appeal is preferred has proceeded wholly upon some ground other than that on which the Appellate Court proceeds." 11. In the present case, the learned First Appellate Court has merely on its coming to the conclusion that the finding on Issues No.1 to 3 & 9 are required to be set-aside and that an additional issue needs to be framed and to be decided by the learned trial court has remanded back the matter. 12. The case in hand clearly falls within the four corners of provisions of Order 41, Rule 24 CPC and it was incumbent on the learned First Appellate Court to itself decide the issues and finally determine the suit and the remand of the case in the facts and circumstance of present case was wholly beyond power of remand as discussed here-in-before. 13. In that view of the matter, the judgment and decree passed by the learned First Appellate Court dated 19.11.2011 is quashed and set-aside. The Civil Appeal No.4/2010 is restored back to the file of learned Additional District Judge, Bhinmal,5 District Jalore, who shall now deal with the appeal afresh on the material available on record keeping in view the observations made here-in-before. The record of the learned Appellate Court be sent back forthwith. Both the parties shall remain present before the learned First Appellate Court on 2.9.2013.With the above observations/direction, this appeal stands disposed of. The stay application also stands disposed of. Appeal disposed Of. *******