Order : NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA, J. This civil writ petition has been filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs (for short “the plaintiffs”) against the order dated 21.02.2013 passed by the Additional District Judge No.1, Bundi in Civil Appeal No.69/2011 whereby the said court allowed the application under Order 41 Rule 28 CPC filed by the respondents-defendants (for short ‘the defendants’) and remanded the matter to the trial court to decide the same afresh in the light of additional documents taken on record under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC. 2. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs submits that the plaintiffs filed a suit for cancellation of sale deed and recovery of possession of the disputed land. The said suit was decreed by the trial court vide its order dated 18.11.1998. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs further submits that the defendants filed an appeal against the said order and also filed the documents under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC. The appellate Court took the documents on record and vide its order dated 21.02.2013 remanded the matter to the trial court to decide the matter afresh in the light of the additional evidence taken on record. 3. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs also submits that trial court had committed an error in remanding the matter. The appellate court had to consider the documents at the appellate stage and decide the appeal on merit instead of remanding the same to the trial court. So, order dated 21.02.2013 passed by the appellate court be set aside. 4. Learned counsel for the defendants has opposed the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the plaintiffs and submitted that the appellate Court has rightly remanded the matter because documents were to be proved by way of the evidence, so, order of the appellate court does not suffer from any illegality and infirmity. So, the present civil writ petition filed by the plaintiffs being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. 6. It is an admitted position that during the pendency of the appeal, appellate court allowed the application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC filed by the defendants and took the documents on record. So, these documents were required to be proved by adducing the evidence. 6. It is an admitted position that during the pendency of the appeal, appellate court allowed the application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC filed by the defendants and took the documents on record. So, these documents were required to be proved by adducing the evidence. So in my considered opinion, appellate court had not committed any error in remanding the matter to the trial court to decide the same afresh in the light of additional documents taken on record under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC. So the present civil writ petition filed by the plaintiffs being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly. 7. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s), disposed of.