KHIROD MONDAL Vs. NARAYAN MONDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Judgment and decree 1st September, 1995 passed by the learned senior subordinate Judge at Port Blair in Title Suit No. 6 of 1991 came up for consideration before the learned District Judge, Port Blair in Civil First Appeal. Upon hearing the learned advocates for the parties and on consideration of various points involved, learned District Judge vide Judgment under appeal dated 28th November 1997, after setting aside the judgment and decree of the learned trial court and by allowing the Civil First Appeal, sent back the suit on open remand for trial afresh. It is against this judgment that the present appeal has been filed by the appellant who was the defendant in Title Suit No. 6 of 1991.

(2.) The respondent in the appeal has been duly served. Affidavit of service was also filed. Today also a fresh affidavit of the service has been filed whereby it is indicated that the respondent was sent notice under registered post with acknowledgement due card and uptil date, the same has not yet been received back, thus raising a presumption of due service.

(3.) Mr. Gupta, learned Advocate for the appellant, has submitted that even if the learned District Judge did not agree with the findings of the learned trial Judge with regard to the admissibility, relevance or reliability of the documents produced before the learned trial Judge by the plaintiff-respondent, there was no reason for the learned District Judge to remand the suit for re-trial since the learned District Judge himself could have considered all these aspects in the appeal before him.