A suit was filed by one Chit Kumar Biswakarma, respondent No.2 in the present appeal against one Jatin Kalita, defendant No.l and Prabhat Kalita, defendant No.2 and defendant No.3 Nalbari Hari Mandir 'Gift Coupon' Committee represented by its President, Secretary and members etc. The suit was filed for declaration that the gift coupon issued and sold by Nalbar Hari Mandir Charity Committee belong to plaintiff and other consequential relief. The prayers made are as follows : (a) a decree declaring that the Gift Coupon No.17425 issued and sold by Charity Committee defendant Nos.3-3 (m) belongs to plaintiff, (b) and consequently the plaintiff is entitled to get the first prize fetched on gift coupon, (c) Cost of the suit etc. 2. Defendant No. 1 filed written statement and in paragraph 11 stand taken by him was as follows: "This defendant categorically asserts that Coupon No. 17425 of Book No. 158 of series No.C were sold to this defendant and the said coupon was kept by defendant at his disposal, and produced the same on 3.1.86 before the Secretary of the Hari Mandir Gift Coupon Committee, 1985, for awarding him the Ambassador Car. That the production of the coupon was acknowledged by the Secretary of the Gift Coupon Committee on 3.1.86 and promised to Hand over the car to this defendant on 4.1.86." There was a prayer by this defendant' to dismiss the suit. Defendant No.3 had also filed a written statement. Issue No.7 in the suit was as follows: "Whether the Gift Coupon No.17425 of series No.C in Book No.158 is purchased by the plaintiff and whether the plaintiff is entitled to declaration as prayed for. Witnesses were examined on behalf of the parties. The learned Munsiff found with regard to Issue No.7 inter alia as follows : "Admittedly Constable Jatin Kalita is the pin on which the entire suit terms as both the plaintiff and the answering defendant No. I claims to have purchased the disputed coupon No.17425 from him. That first person Constable Jatin Kalita was examined as PW 2 by the plaintiff. A cursory peep into his evidence disclosed that he sold the Coupon No.17424 and 17425 from Book No.158 of C series to the plaintiff Jatin Kalita. That first person Constable Jatin Kalita was examined as PW 2 by the plaintiff. A cursory peep into his evidence disclosed that he sold the Coupon No.17424 and 17425 from Book No.158 of C series to the plaintiff Jatin Kalita. Produced the inner folio of the said book and laid the same into evidence as Ext 2 and the inner folio of coupon No. 17425 has been proved by him as Ext 3 (2). He said both the coupons were sold by him to the plaintiff in the said police out post. He said that he made the entry of the plaintiff's name in the inner-folio of the said two coupons at about 15 minutes later after the sale as he had no pen with him at that time. During cross examination he deposed that the name of the plaintiff in the inner folio of the two coupons were written by the O/C of the thana at his direction." Having arrived at this finding, the learned Munsiff decreed the suit and held that the Gift Coupon No. 17425 of C series by series of Book No. 158 was purchased by he plaintiff and as such it belongs to the plaintiff. 3. There was an appeal by Jatin Kalita, defendant No.l being Title Appeal No.4 of 1987 before the learned District Judge at Nalbari and the learned District Judge allowed the appeal and gave the following direction : Let the Ambassador Car be delivered to the defendant-appellant on production of Gift Coupon No.C-17425. It is the legality and validity of that appellate order which is challenged in this second appeal. 4. I have heard Sri AK Goswami, learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondents. Even if defendant is found to be entitled to the relief and even then the lower appellate Court had no jurisdiction to give direction regarding delivery of Ambassador Car on production of the gift coupon. There, was no such prayer made by the defendant and the lower appellate Court had no jurisdiction to pass a decree in a matter which was not the subject matter of the suit. 5. In that view of the matter, this second appeal shall stand disposed of with the direction that this part of the decree shall stand deleted. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. 5. In that view of the matter, this second appeal shall stand disposed of with the direction that this part of the decree shall stand deleted. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. Hari Mandir shall not responsible for the same as it is fight between Jaitn Kalita and Chet Kumar Biswakarma and they will be at liberty to sort out the matter amongst themselves.