RSA 365 of 1996. 16.7.2008 Present: Mr. Ramakant Sharma, counsel for the appellant. Mr. K.D.Sood with Mr. B.K.Sood, counsel for the respondent. When this appeal was taken up for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the appellant urged substantial question of law No. 5 for consideration. The question reads: “ Whether the impugned judgment and decree could have been passed by the courts below especially when the defendants in their amended written statement in para 1 categorically admitted that they have no concern with respect to the land comprised in khasra No. 2640?” Learned counsel has drawn my attention to the amended written statement filed by the defendants and more especially to paragraph No. 1. The defendant therein has pleaded “…However the answering defendant has nothing to do with khasra No. 2640, but the same is not traceable….” If that be so, the judgment cannot be sustained, as the case of the plaintiff was very specific to khasra No. 2640. In these circumstances, this appeal is allowed on this question alone and the matter is remanded to the learned District Judge for decision afresh. He will determine as to whether khasra No. 2640 -2- exists or not or whether the admission made by the defendants has been explained away from the evidence on record. Learned counsel appearing for the defendant submits that this issue shall not arise for determination as the suit of the plaintiff has been dismissed on the grounds of maintainability and limitation also. Needless to observe, both these grounds will be considered by the learned District Judge in detail before the issue of admission is taken up. Parties to appear before the learned District Judge on 31.7.2008. A further direction is issued to the learned District Judge that he will dispose of the appeal not later than 30.11.2008. All pending applications shall stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. July 16, 2008 (PC). (Dev Darshan Sud), J.