( 1 ) THIS is a Full Bench reference.

( 2 ) THE defendant-appellant, Mata Prasad Pandey came up to this Court by way of appeal under order 43, Rule 1 (u), Civil P. C. He challenged the appellate order of the learned Civil Judge, fyzabad, passed in appeal under Order 43, Rule 1 (a), Civil P. C. remanding the case for disposal on merits under Order 41, Rule 23, Civil P. C.

( 3 ) ON the date on which this appeal was first argued before a single Judge of this Court, it was conceded that a second appeal against the appellate order of remand was incompetent. It was prayed, however, that the memorandum of appeal be treated as a revision. The sole question for determination before us is whether the order of remand passed under Order 41, Rule 23 constitutes a case decided within the meaning of Section 115, Civil P. C. The reference was necessitated because of a conflict between the Oudh Chief Court and the Allahabad view on the aforementioned question.

( 4 ) THE suit was for recovery of possession of certain tenancy plots and for damages. The plaintiffs Earn Adhar Pandey and Sobha Kalwar claimed to be tenants of the lands on Rs. 30 per annum under a lease executed by the zemindari