AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anil R. Dave, J—Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties.
The learned Counsel could not dispute the fact that while deciding Regular Second Appeal No. 390 of 1996, the High Court had not considered the judgment delivered by this Court in the case of Abubakar Abdul Inamdar (dead) by LRs. and others Vs. Harun Abdul Inamdar and Others, AIR 1996 SC 112 : AIR 1995 SC 112 : (1995) 7 JT 179 : (1995) 5 SCALE 87 : (1995) 5 SCC 612 : (1995) 3 SCR 172 Supp , which prima facie appears to be quite relevant.
In the circumstances, the appeal is remitted to the High Court so that after considering the afore-stated judgment and other relevant judgments, which might be referred to by the learned Counsel for the parties, the appeal can be decided afresh.
We also clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the High Court will decide the matter after considering the submissions which might be made and judgment(s) which might be cited.
The impugned judgment is set aside and the appeal is allowed with no order as to costs.
The parties shall appear before the High Court on 14th September, 2015, so that the appeal can be decided at an early date.