- (1.)The present appeal has been filed by the appellants-defendants challenging the order dated 07.02.2005 passed by the Additional District Judge, Dholpur in Regular Civil Appeal No.13/02 (hereinafter referred to as "the appellate court"), whereby the appellate court while setting aside the judgment & decree dated 02.01.2002 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Dholpur (hereinafter referred to as "the trial court") in Civil Suit No.56/93, remanded the matter back to the trial court for deciding the suit afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties.
(2.)The short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the respondents-plaintiffs had filed the suit seeking recovery of possession and demolition of construction in the suit property, and also for the permanent injunction. It was alleged inter alia by the respondents-plaintiffs that they had purchased the plot in question on 14.11.1967 from one Shri Raghuveer Prasad, who had purchased the same from one Ram Kishan on 13.01.1962 and that the said Ram Kishan had purchased the said plot from the Municipal Board, Dholpur in September 1946. According to the respondents-plaintiffs, they had sought the permission from the Municipal Board, Dholpur to construct the house and shops, which permission was granted on 22.09.1971, and thereafter the house and shops on the plot were constructed as shown in the map annexed to the plaint. It was further alleged in the plaint that the defendants had put up illegal construction on the disputed plot by making encroachment, and therefore the suit for demolition of the said construction and possession of the disputed plot as well as for the permanent injunction was filed by the respondents-plaintiffs. The said suit was resisted by the appellants-defendants by filing the written statement contending inter alia that the construction was put up by the defendants on the disputed plot in the year 1993 and the site plan and the boundaries shown by the plaintiffs were not showing the correct position. The appellants had also denied the allegation that they were intending to close the doors of the respondents by making encroachment over the land of the respondents.
(3.)The trial court after taking into consideration the evidence on record, had partly decreed the suit of the respondents and restrained the appellants from closing the doors marked as 'X & Y' in the site plan (Exhibit-10) vide the judgment & decree dated 02.01.2002. The trial court dismissed the other prayers of the respondents-plaintiffs. Being aggrieved by the said judgment & decree, the respondents had preferred the appeal before the appellate court. The appellate court without reversing the decree passed by the trial court, set aside the judgment and decree dated 02.01.2002 passed by the trial court and remanded the matter back to the trial court for deciding the suit afresh, vide the order 07.02.2005. The appellants being aggrieved by the said order has preferred the present appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1 (U) of CPC.