ORDER

1. NONE REPRESENTS THE RESPONDENTS.

2. HEARD LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANTS.

3. LEAVE GRANTED.

4. ON 9-7-2004, WHILE ISSUING NOTICE WE HAVE INDICATED THAT THIS MATTER SHOULD BE REMANDED BACK TO THE HIGH COURT TO FRAME SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW BEFORE DECIDING THE APPEAL BY THE HIGH COURT. IN THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT THE ONLY QUESTION CONSIDERED BY THE HIGH COURT IS "WHETHER THE APPELLATE COURTS FINDING IS BASED ON ANY MATERIAL OR BASED ON MERE SURMISES AND CONJECTURES". THIS, IN OUR OPINION, IS NOT A SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW AS REQUIRED IN SECTION 100 CPC. THEREFORE, IT IS NECESSARY THAT THIS APPEAL BE REMITTED BACK TO THE HIGH COURT TO CONSIDER WHETHER THE APPEAL RAISES ANY SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER SECTION 100 CPC AND IF SO TO FRAME THE SAME AND DECIDE THE APPEAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THEREFORE, C WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND REMAND THE APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT FOR FRESH DISPOSAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

5. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THIS APPEAL IS ALLOWED AND THE MATTER IS REMITTED BACK TO THE HIGH COURT.