ORDER: The lower appellate Court had remanded the matter for framing an issue with regard to adverse possession and ouster and for letting in evidence in respect of certain documents that were produced pending appeal. This appeal is against the order of remand.

2. The petitioners are the defendants 1 to 5 and 7 to 11 in the suit O.S. No.181 of 1991 filed by the respondent herein. The suit ws for declaration of title, for possession and for interim injunction. The case of the respondent is that the suit property originally belonged to his father Ratna Chettiar (RC) and his three brothers Rangasamy Chettiar, Velayudha Chettiar and Narayanasamy Chettiar (NC and 2nd defendant in the suit). The four brothers divided the properties on 10.10.1957 under a registered partition deed. A registration copy of this deed is marked as Ex.A-1. A, B, C and D Schedule properties were allotted to each of the parties and E schedule property in Ex.A-1 was kept in common. It is the respondent’s case that if any one of the sharers lost any item allotted to his share, the other sharers shall compensate for the said loss or the sharer who lost can be compensated from E Schedule property. It is the case of th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document