GIRIDHARI PRADHAN Vs. LORD JAGANNATH MAHAPRABHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri S. K. Das for the appellant and Shri P. K. Mohapatra for the respondents.

(2.) THE plaintiff is in appeal against the order dated 20.3.1999 passed by the 2nd Addt. District Judge, Puri, in T. A. No. 18/62 of 1998/95 setting aside the judgment and decree and remanding the suit, i.e., T. S. No. 210/83 to the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puri, with a direction to readmit the suit and proceed to determine the suit keeping in view the direction of this Court given in S. A. No. 410 of 1989.

(3.) SHRI S. K. Das, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that after disposal of the second appeal, the plaintiff filed an application for amendment of the plaint detailing therein identification of the land and the amendment was duly allowed by the trial court on 12.4.1994. On 29.11.1994 the plaintiff appellant filed an application under Order 26, Rule 9 of the Code of Civil procedure ('CPC' in short) for appointment of a survey knowing commissioner for identification of the suit property. The trial court allowed the said application and appointed a survey knowing commissioner, who submitted his report giving identification and demarcation of the suit schedule property. The trial court by judgment dated 29.4.1995 did not accept the Commissioner's report and dismissed the suit with the observation that the description of the suit property in the plaint was not sufficient for its identification. Against the judgment and decree passed by the trial court, the plaintiff appellant preferred an appeal before the District Judge, Puri. The appeal on being transferred was heard by 2nd Addl. District Judge, Puri, who by judgment dated 20.3.1999 passed in T. A. No 18/62 of 1998/95 allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree and remanded the suit to the trial court. In paragraph 8 of the judgment, the lower appellate court came to conclude as follows :