P. Joseph, J.

This appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law:

1) When as per Ext.C2(a), survey plan submitted by the Advocate Commissioner, eastern boundary of the plaint schedule property is along `EKF' line which is also along the natural boundar' signified by the existence of anjili trees and the plaintiff did not seek Ext.C2(a), plan to be set aside either before the trial court or before the lower appellate court, was the lower appellate court justified in remanding the case to the trial court to enable the plaintiff to amend the plaint and seek a declaration of title and recovery of possession?

2) When even the plaintiff did not file any application for amendment of the plaint, was the lower appellate court right in setting aside judgment and decree passed by the trial court and remanding the case to the trial court to enable the plaintiff convert the suit into one for declaration of title, recovery of possession etc.?

3) When there has already been a trial on evidence before the court of first instance, was the appellate court right in exercising its power under Order 41, Rule 23 of the Code of Civil Procedure, (for short "the Code") in View of t