Satyabrata Sinha, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and final decree passed by Sri S.K. Ganguly, learned Assistant District Judge, Burdwan in Title Suit No. 68 of 1985 whereby and whereunder the said learned Judge by an order dated 12.7.89 passed the final decree upon acceptance of the Commissioner's report only stating : "Challan showing deposit of Rs. 97/- towards balance commission fee is filed by the plaintiff. No objection is filed by any of the parties against the report of the Commissioner. Hence, the report of the Commissioner is accepted. The suit is brought back to file and is decreed finally in terms of the report of the Commissioner which do form part of the final decree."
(2.) Mr. Bidyut Kumar Banerjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has raised a short question in support of this appeal.
(3.) Learned counsel submits that after the report was filed by the learned Commissioner before the learned court below, by order No. 43 dated 13.6.89 a direction was issued to show the said order sheet to the learned counsel for both the parties so as to enable them to file objections by 12.7.89. It appears that whereas one Sri Indra Narayan Mukherji, learned Advocate was appearing for the plaintiff-respondent, Sri Swapan Sen and appearing for the defendant/appellant. From the order sheet dated 13.6.89, it does not appear that the said order sheet was shown to the learned Advocate for the defendant/appellant. In that view of the matter, there cannot be any doubt whatsoever that there has been a violation of the requirement of Order 26 Rule 18-A of the Civil Procedure Code as well as the principles of natural justice.;