ORDER

Leave granted.

2. We have heard learned Counsel for the Appellants and learned Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 who are the contesting Respondents finally in this appeal.

3. Respondent No. 5 who is a contesting Respondent though served, has not thought it fit to appear and contest the present proceedings. Respondent No. 4 who is deemed to be served has not thought it fit to appear and contest the proceedings though 30 days are over since the issuance of notice to him. Respondent Nos. 6 and 9 who are reported dead are merely proforma Respondents. Their names shall stand struck off from the record as no application for bringing their legal representatives on record is filed so far by the Appellants. Rest of the Respondents are proforma Respondents.

4. In a suit of the year 1980, the High Court by its impugned judgment has remanded the proceedings for fresh decision of the trial Court. The reasoning adopted by the High Court for passing the remand order is that no issue was framed about the exact identification of the property. When we turn to page 40 of the paper book we find that the trial Court has already framed one issue to that effect issue No. 1 reads as under.

"1.