Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J. - (1.) An order of remand passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 1st Court at Howrah in Title Appeal No. 89 of 2004 has been challenged in this appeal by the plaintiff/appellant on the following grounds : (i) Without considering the judgment of the learned trial Court as a whole, the learned Court below ought not to have set aside the judgment of the trial Court as a whole. (ii) The learned Court below erred in not following the provision of Order 41, Rule 28 and Rule 29 of the Civil Procedure Code for reception of additional evidence in appeal after allowing the applications filed by the respective parties for admission of additional evidence in appeal under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Civil Procedure Code. (iii) The learned Court below failed to draw a line of distinction between the scope of reception of additional evidence in appeal under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Civil Procedure Code and the scope of remand as provided under Order 41, Rule 23, Rule 23A and Rule 25 of the Civil Procedure Code.
(2.) The plaintiffs/appellants filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the defendants/respondents herein.
(3.) The real dispute which is involved in the suit is as to whether the defendant is a premises tenant under the plaintiffs in respect of the suit property or he is a thika tenant in respect thereof.;