HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU C.M.A. No. 561 of 2006 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 16.2.2006 passed in A.S. No. 33 of 2002 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Kurnool. 2. The appellants filed the suit in O.S. No. 302 of 1999 before the II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool for declaration of title in respect of “ABCD” portion as shown in the plaint plan and for delivery of possession. The said suit was decreed by the trial Court vide Judgment and decree dated 1.5.2002 in favour of the appellants. Aggrieved by the same, the respondents carried the matter in appeal before the lower appellate Court. The lower appellate Court, by the impugned order, allowed the appeal and remanded the matter back to the trial Court with a direction to the trial Court to give an opportunity to both the parties to amend their pleadings and thereafter to adduce necessary evidence and also to re-entrust the warrant to the Advocate Commissioner. 3. Heard both sides. 4. There cannot be any dispute that the appellate Court is well within its competence to remand the matter to the trial Court for fresh consideration of some of the aspects of the case which are in ambiguity. Even otherwise, the learned counsel for appellant wanted to expunge certain observations made by appellate Court against the appellant. 5. As there is variance in the report of the Advocate Commissioner and the Mandal Surveyor, the lower appellate Court rightly remanded the matter to the trial Court. Hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned Judgment. 6. However, the observation of the lower appellate Court in the impugned order that the appellants-plaintiffs have not come to the Court with clean hands is unwarranted in view of the fact that the lower appellate Court has given an opportunity to both the parties to amend their pleadings and let in their evidence. Therefore, the observation of the lower appellate Court that “the circumstances enumerated also amply establish that the plaintiffs have not approached the Court with clean hands and utterly failed to establish their claim and hence they are not entitled to the reliefs prayed for by them” is expunged. 7. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ______________ K.C. BHANU,J DATE: 28TH March, 2011 pnb