R.L. Anand, J. - With the assistance of the counsel for the parties, I have gone through the impugned judgment dated 31.3.1997. The plaintiff was non- suited by the trial Court mainly on the ground that he did not serve a valid notice under Section 80, CPC. This finding was set aside by the first Appellate Court, for the reasons given in paras 8 to 15 of its judgment, which read as under :-

"8. I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents and record available on the file.

9. The learned Counsel for the appellant has argued that the findings of the learned trial Court on issues 3 and 4 are liable to be set aside because the plaintiff has specifically pleaded in the plaint that he served the defendants with notice under Section 80 CPC before filing the present suit. Para No. 5 of the plaint is to this effect. It is also argued that even the copy of the said notice served upon the defendants-respondent under Section 80 CPC was attached along with the plaint and the postal receipts were also filed. The copy of the notice is Ex.P-2 whereas the postal receipts are Ex.P3 and P4. It is thus argued that from these documents