1. This and two other appeals were argued this morning at some length Most of the points arising for decision are common to all the three appeals and have been very elaborately argued by Mr. A. Krishnaswami Aiyar for the appellant in A. A. O. No. 170 of 1918. The lower appellate Court remanded each of the appeals for retrial and appeals purporting to be under Order 43 Rule 1(u) have been preferred to this Court. It was held in A. A. O. No. 243 of 1918 that where the order of remand was made not on a preliminary point, no appeal lies against it. Mr. A. Krishnaswami Aiyar conceded that if an order can be predicated as not falling within Order 41 Rule 23, and if it is to be held that the Court has an inherent power of remand apart from the said rule, there is no right of appeal, Further this point is concluded by authority.

2. The main argument of the learned vakil related to the inherent power of the Court to make a remand other than under the conditions mentioned in Rule 23 of Order 41; we are prepared to agree with him that Section 107 of the Code in terms only refers to Order 41 Rule 23. The word prescribed as denned in Section 2, Clause 16, seems to make this clear. But Se