( 1 ) ADMIT. Mr. Vimal Patel, learned advocate waives service of notice of admission on behalf of respondent no. 1 who is the main contesting party. Paper book and printing is dispensed with.

( 2 ) IN the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties the appeal is taken up for final hearing today.

( 3 ) PRESENT Second Appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil procedure has been preferred by the appellants - original defendants No. l and 6 to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 31. 1. 2008 passed by the learned presiding Officer, 1st Fast Track Court. Mahesana in Regular Civil Appeal no. 13 of 2003 dismissing the same and confirming the judgment and decree dated 31. 3. 2003 passed by the learned trial Court passed in Regular Civil Suit no. 188 of 1996.

( 4 ) BEING aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge (J. D. ). Kadi passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 188 of 1996, the appellants herein - original defendants No. l and 6 preferred regular Civil. Appeal No. 13 of 2003 before the District Court Mahesana under Order 41 Rule 31 of the CPC read with Section 96 of the CPC. The aforesaid appeal came to be heard. decided and disposed of by the learned presiding Officer, 1st Fast Track Court, mahesana, who by his impugned judgment and order dated 31. 1. 2008 dismissing the said appeal and confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court.

( 5 ) AT the outset it is required to be noted that number of issues were raised by the trial Court while deciding the suit inclusive of the ownership of the disputed land/property in question etc. , which were framed at Exh. 59. Still the learned appellate Court while deciding the appeal framed only one point for determination which reads as under:-"whether the impugned order dated 31. 3. 2003 passed by the Civil Judge (J. D.) Kadi in Regular Civil Suit no. 188/96, is illegal, perverse and against the principle of law and is liable to be set aside?

( 6 ) THE learned appellate Court without framing any other issue had proceeded further with the appeal and ultimately dismissed the said appeal.

( 7 ) IT is to be borne in mind that as provided under Order 41 Rule 31 of the cpc, the judgment of the appellate court shall state - (a) the points for determination; (b) the decision thereon; (c) the reasons for the decision; and (d)where the decree appealed from is reversed or varied, the relief to which the appellant is entitled.

( 8 ) SHRI Suresh M. Shah, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants has relied upon Rule 414 of the CPC which reads as under:-

"rule 414 :- The appellate Court should frame suitable points for determination in appeals in accordance with the same principles on which issues are framed in the trial Court. "

( 9 ) IN view of the above and considering the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned appellate Court, it appears that the learned appellate Court has not strictly followed Order 41 Rule 31 of the CPC. 'the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned appellate Court is absolutely non-reasoned order and even the learned appellate Court has not properly framed the points for determination. To frame the point for determination to the effect that whether the impugned judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court is illegal, perverse or against the principle of law and is liable to be set aside, it cannot be said that the learned appellate court has properly framed the points for determination. The learned appellate Court was required to frame the points for determination considering the issues involved in the matter which were dealt with and considered by the learned trial Court. Thus, the impugned judgment and order. passed by the learned appellate Court cannot be sustained.

( 10 ) SHRI Vimal Patel. learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent No. l herein - original plaintif