NAROTTAM RAJARAM Vs. MOHANLAL KAHANDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants before us are the plaintiffs and they sued for accounts and for redemption of certain mortgaged property under the Dekkhan Agriculturists Relief Act. The trial Court took careful and elaborate accounts under the Act from a period so far removed as Samvat 1926. As a result it found that the mortgage, which was a mortgage with possession, had been paid off, and therefore decreed that possession should be restored to the plaintiffs on their payment of the mortgagee s costs.

(2.) The defendant appealed, and the learned First Class Subordinate Judge differed from the trial Court s findings as to certain items of the account and as to whether one particular parcel of the land mortgaged had been proved to have been in the mortgagee s possassion. He thereupon reversed the original decree and reminded the case for taking fresh accounts with reference to the observations in his judgment.

(3.) It is from this order that the plaintiffs bring this present appeal. The question, therefore, before us is, whether in the state of facts which we have described, an order of remand can lawfully be made. That is the sole question before us; and it must be understood that our judgment is confined to a decision on these facts.