C.L.VERMA, j. - (1.) THIS second appeal has been filed by Deena against the judgment and decree dated 24-1-94/29-1-94 passed by learned Additional Commis­sioner, Jhansi in Appeal No. 46/22/60 of 1987-88/Hamirpur.
(2.) BY the impugned order the learned Additional Commissioner allowed the ap­peal, set aside tbc order of the trial Court and remanded the case to it for fresh decision after framing issue on the ques­tion of re-marriage of Smt.Tijia. Briefly the facts of the case are that Ram Asrey and others instituted a suit for declaration of their rights. The plaintiffs claimed to be the bhumidhars of the land in question on the basis of will executed by Smt. Tijia, widow of Parsadwa. They also pleaded that the defendants did not raise any objection during the course of con­solidation operations and hence the entries made there under were final and the defence is barred by Section 49 of the UPCH Act. The defendants raised various pleas. They averred that Smt. Tijia had re-married and had no right to executed a sale-deed. The trial Court did not believe the theory of will set up by the plaintiffs. It held that Smt. Tijiya had re-married Har Charan. On appeal the learned Additional Commissioner found that the question concerning re-marriage of Smt. Tijiya had not been property decided by the trial Court as even an issue had not been struck on the point. He accordingly remanded the case to the trial Court. Hence, the present second appeal.
(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.;