JUDGMENT 1. - This is S.B. Civil Second appeal by the defendant against the judgment and decree dated 23.4.1993 whereby learned additional District Judge, Hindaun city setting aside the judgment and decree dated 7.1.1991 passed by the then Munsif, Hindaun city decreed the plaintiff-respondent's suit for a sum of Rs. 5,000/- with interest. 2. The relevant facts for disposal of this second appeal are that the plaintiff Babu Lal filed a civil suit in the Court of learned Munsif, Hindaun city with the averments that he advanced a sum of Rs. 6,000/- to the defendant on 30.6.1977 An agreement was executed in plaintiff's favour. On 5.5.1980 the defendant agreed to sell his agricultural land for a consideration of Rs. 5,000/- out of Rs. 6.000/- already advanced to the defendant. But the defendant failed to perform his part of the contract. The plaintiff, thus made a prayer for specific performance of the agreement. 3. The defendant in written statement denied all the averments of the plaint 4. Five issues were framed and after recording evidence of the parties, learned Munsif vide judgment dated 7.1.1991 dismissed the suit. First appeal No. 7/1992 preferred by the plaintiff-appellant was allowed vide impugned judgment dated 23 4.1993. 5. On 15.3.1994 following two substantial questions of law were framed. : 1. Whether the learned Additional District Judge, Hindaun city was justified in passing a decree with interest in favour of the plaintiff-respondent even though no such prayer was made in the plaint by him. 2. Whether the judgment passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Hindaun city deserves to be set aside on the ground that the same is not in conformity with Order 41 Rules 31 & 33 of the CPC. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Both the counsel submit that the First Appellate Court failed to comply with the mandatory provisions is of Order 41, Rule 31 CPC as the first appellate Court did not frame the points for determination and also did not record its decision on the issues framed by the trial Court and simply passed a decree of Rs. 5,000/- with interest, hence, the matter should be sent back to the first appellate Court for a fresh decision on all the issues involved in the first appeal. 5,000/- with interest, hence, the matter should be sent back to the first appellate Court for a fresh decision on all the issues involved in the first appeal. Both the counsel further submit 20 that since the matter has to be remanded, decision on the first question of law by this Court is not required. 7. In view of the joint submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this second appeal is allowed. Hence, the impugned judgment and decree passed by the first appellate Court are set aside and the first appeal is remanded to the first appellate Court for afresh decision on all the points involved in the first appeal. The parties are directed to appear before the first appellate Court on 19.4.2004 and thereafter the first appellate Court after giving opportunity of hearing would decide this appeal without further delay. Record of the trial Court as well as first appellate Court along with copy of this judgment be sent back within ten days positively.Appeal Allowed-Case Remanded As Above. *******