JUDGMENT Satyabrata Sinha, J.: This appeal is directed against the judgment and final decree passed by Sri S.K. Ganguly, learned Assistant District Judge, Burdwan in Title Suit No. 68 of 1985 whereby and whereunder the said learned Judge by an order dated 12.7.89 passed the final decree upon acceptance of the Commissioner's report only stating : "Challan showing deposit of Rs. 97/- towards balance commission fee is filed by the plaintiff. No objection is filed by any of the parties against the report of the Commissioner. Hence, the report of the Commissioner is accepted. The suit is brought back to file and is decreed finally in terms of the report of the Commissioner which do form part of the final decree." 2. Mr. Bidyut Kumar Banerjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has raised a short question in support of this appeal. 3. Learned counsel submits that after the report was filed by the learned Commissioner before the learned court below, by order No. 43 dated 13.6.89, a direction was issued to show the said order sheet to the learned counsel for both the parties so as to enable them to file objections by 12.7.89. It appears that whereas one Sri Indra Narayan Mukherji, learned Advocate was appearing for the plaintiff-respondent, Sri Swapan Sen was appearing for the defendant/appellant. From the order sheet dated 13.6.89, it does not appear that the said order sheet was shown to the learned Advocate for the defendant/appellant. In that view of the matter, there cannot be any doubt whatsoever that there has been a violation of the requirement of Or. 26 r. 18A of the Code of Civil Procedure as well as the principles of natural justice. 4. For the reasons aforementioned, the impugned judgment and final decree cannot be sustained. However, keeping in view the fact that the matter is pending for a long time, it is directed that the defendant/appellant may file an objection before the learned trial court within one month from date and the said objection, if any, must be disposed of within one month thereafter. It is made clear that no further notice need be served upon the defendant/appellant. 5. For the reasons aforementioned, the appeal is allowed and remitted back with the aforementioned directions. In the facts and circumstances, there will be no order as to costs. Lower court records be sent down forthwith. It is made clear that no further notice need be served upon the defendant/appellant. 5. For the reasons aforementioned, the appeal is allowed and remitted back with the aforementioned directions. In the facts and circumstances, there will be no order as to costs. Lower court records be sent down forthwith. Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.: I agree. Appeal allowed and the case sent back on remand with directions.