As per the case facts, the plaintiff's suit for cancellation of a sale deed and prohibitory injunction was dismissed by the trial court. The High Court, however, disposed of the ... plaintiff's appeal by directing a de novo trial, stating that necessary evidence was not on record and without recording findings on whether the plaintiff was prevented from adducing evidence or explaining why the decree was reversed. This led to the appeal to the Supreme Court. The question arose whether the High Court was justified in remanding the matter for a de novo trial without recording findings on why evidence was not produced and why the decree was reversed. Finally, the Supreme Court found the High Court's decision to remand for a de novo trial unjustified. It set aside the High Court's judgment related to the specific appeal and restored the appeal for reconsideration by the High Court in accordance with the law. The Supreme Court emphasized that the High Court had not recorded any finding on whether the plaintiff was prevented from examining herself or adducing other evidence, nor did it explain on what ground the decree was being reversed.