URMILA DEVI Vs. SHYAM SUNDER & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. None has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent, despite service was found sufficient by this Court by means of the order dated 26.09.2019.

(2.) The instant appeal has been preferred under Order 43 Rule 1 (u) C.P.C. being aggrieved against the judgment of remand dated 05.02.1991 passed in Civil Appeal No. 279 of 1984 by the Vth Additional District Judge, Faizabad whereby it set aside the judgment and decree dated 15.10.1984 passed in O.S. No. 126 of 1984 requiring for a de-novo trial permitting the parties to amend their pleadings as well as to lead evidence if they so desire.

(3.) In order to appreciate the contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant, the fact giving rise to the aforesaid appeal may be noticed first:-