THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD A.S.NO.158 OF 2010 JUDGMENT: {Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao} The appellants-defendants filed this appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, inter alia, seeking to assail the correctness of the judgment dated 06.11.2009 in O.S.No.163 of 2005 on the file of the Family Court-cum-Additional District Judge, Guntur, in decreeing the suit filed for specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 22.02.1997 and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering the suit schedule property. Briefly stated, the facts, which are necessary for disposal of this appeal, are that in the suit filed for specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 22.02.1997, the appellants herein-defendants contested the same by raising several pleas, upon which the Court below o proceeded to dispose of the same. On a reading of the judgment, it appears that no issues have been framed or even though framed, they have not been referred to in the judgment. However, the Court below taken into consideration the evidence available on record, namely P.W.1, who has been examined and Exs.A1 to A11, which have been marked on behalf of the respondents herein and decreed the suit. On a perusal of the evidence available on record, it is seen that no witness is examined nor any document is marked on behalf of the appellants herein. Therefore, the grievance of the appellants is that they could not possibly adduce the evidence since no proper opportunity was given. There is no dispute to the fact that the appellants did not have opportunity to produce the evidence in rebuttal with that of the respondents herein. In fact, as could be evident from the record, when the matter was posted for evidence since the appellants herein were not ready, their right to cross examine the respondents was also denied. In view of the denial of opportunity to contest the matter, we are of the opinion that an opportunity should be given to the appellants herein wherein substantial rights of the parties were involved effecting substantive properties. The appeal is allowed and the judgment dated 06.11.2009 in O.S.No.163 of 2005 is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Court below for disposal afresh in accordance with law, after giving notice and opportunity to both the sides. No costs. It is made clear that both the parties are at liberty to adduce the evidence, if they choose to do so. It is stated that, as per the order of this Court dated 10.03.2010 in ASMP.No.430 of 2010, costs have already been deposited. The withdrawal of the said amount would be subject to the result of the main suit. The Court below shall dispose of the suit within a period of three {3} months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) __________________ (P.DURGA PRASAD, J) 7th February 2011 RRB