J U D G M E N T

This is an appeal preferred against the judgment of the Subordinate Judge, Perumbavoor in A.S.No.35/2008. The suit is one for a declaration and for setting aside the document and the trial court granted a declaration to the effect that document No.5376/1995 is not binding upon the plaintiffs or on the plaint schedule property. It also granted an order of permanent prohibitory injunction. Against that an appeal was preferred as A.S.No.35/2008. The learned Subordinate Judge has set aside the judgment and decree of the lower court and has remanded back the case to the lower court for a fresh disposal after sending of the admitted finger print of Kalyani for comparison to a finger print expert with the disputed thump impression. It is against that decision, the present appeal is preferred. 2. I had gone through the judgment of both the courts below. The dispute is with respect to the execution of a document by the second defendant in favour of the first respondent with respect to 20 1/2 cents of property. That document is of the year 1995 and subsequent to that, in the year 1998 a document has been executed in favour of the plaintiffs. So, the crucial question that had