Judgment Ms. Bela Trivedi, J.—The present Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the judgment and order dated 31.12.2010 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Vadodara in Regular Civil Appeal No. 25 of 2009. 2. The Court has heard learned Senior advocate Mr. Percy Kavina with Mr. A.S. Asthavadi for the appellants and learned Senior advocate Mr. A.J. Patel with Mr. A.B. Munshi for the respondent. 3. Having heard the Learned Advocates for the parties, it appears that initially, the suit being Special Civil Suit No. 533 of 1998 was filed by the present respondent-original plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the ‘plaintiff’)-Parulben Girishbhai Patel against the present appellants-original defendants (hereinafter referred to as the ‘defendants’) in the Court of 10th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vadodara seeking specific performance of the agreement dated 28.10.1993 executed by the predecessor of the defendants, for the sale of the suit property being Survey No. 313 (Block No. 288) admeasuring 4654 sq.mtrs. situated at village Sevasi, Taluka: District: Vadodara (hereinafter referred to as the ‘suit property’) and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from transferring, selling or alienating the suit land in any manner whatsoever. The learned trial judge framed five issues at Exh.69 in the said suit and after considering the evidence adduced by both the parties, dismissed the suit of the plaintiff vide judgment and order dated 05.09.2005. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order passed by the trial court, the plaintiff filed appeal being Regular Civil Appeal No. 71 of 2005 in the Court of Presiding Officer (F.T.C. No. 8), Vadodara under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The said Appellate Court raised two issues in the said appeal. The said Appellate Court, answered first issue partly in affirmative, and as regards second issue, observed that in view of the discussion made in issue No. 1, the issue No. 2 is accordingly decided. After observing the same, the said Appellate Court partly allowed the appeal and ordered to remand the matter to the trial court for deciding the issue as to whether the parties were ready and willing to perform their part of contract. After observing the same, the said Appellate Court partly allowed the appeal and ordered to remand the matter to the trial court for deciding the issue as to whether the parties were ready and willing to perform their part of contract. While passing the said order, the said Appellate Court set aside the entire judgment and decree dated 05.09.2005 passed in Special Civil Suit No. 533 of 1998, and further directed both the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the ownership and possession of the suit land till the final disposal of the suit. It is pertinent to note that in the said appeal, the Appellate Court also permitted the parties to adduce their respective evidence before the trial court to prove their case. 4. It further transpires that after the remand of the case, the trial court framed following issue in addition to the issues framed at Exh.69:— “Whether the parties are ready and willing to perform their part of contract.” 5. It further appears that thereafter, the parties also led their respective further evidence. However, thereafter, the trial court gave its findings only on the said additional issue, and allowed the suit of the plaintiff vide judgment and order dated 31.03.2009. Accordingly, the defendants were directed and ordered to perform their part of obligations by executing sale deed of the suit property in favour of the plaintiff as per the registered Agreement to Sell dated 28.10.1993 within a period of one month from the date of said order, and the defendants were also permanently restrained from transferring, selling, leasing etc. the suit property to any third party. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree passed by the trial court, the defendants preferred appeal being Regular Civil Appeal No. 25 of 2009 in the Court of learned Principal District Judge, Vadodara, who by the judgment and order dated 31.12.2010, dismissed the said appeal and confirmed the judgment and decree dated 31.03.2009 passed by the trial court in Special Civil Suit No. 533 of 1998. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order passed in the said appeal, the defendants have prepared present Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 6. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order passed in the said appeal, the defendants have prepared present Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 6. During the course of hearing of the present Second Appeal, the Learned Advocates for the parties have submitted that they have no objection if the matter is remanded to the trial court for deciding afresh all issues framed at Exh.69 including the additional issue, considering the same set of evidence led by the parties, and that the trial court be directed to decide the same within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order. It is also agreed by the Learned Advocates for the parties that both the parties shall maintain status quo as regards the possession and ownership of the suit property during the pendency of the suit, and shall co-operate the trial court to dispose of the suit within the fixed time limit. 7. Having regard to the consensus arrived at between the Learned Advocates for the parties and having regard to the order under challenge, the present Second Appeal is required to be disposed of giving following directions. 8. The judgment and order dated 31.12.2010 passed in Regular Civil Appeal No. 25 of 2009, and the judgment and decree dated 31.03.2009 passed in Special Civil Suit No. 533 of 1998 are quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the trial court for deciding the suit afresh, giving its findings on the issues framed at Exh.69 including the additional issue, considering same set of evidence already adduced by the parties in the suit. The trial court shall decide the same after hearing the Learned Advocates for the parties and in accordance with law without being influenced by the observations made earlier in the judgments and decrees passed by the trial court and the Appellate Court, as well as the observations made by this Court in this order. It is clarified that the parties shall not adduce any fresh evidence and shall co-operate the trial court with the hearing of the suit. The trial court is directed to decide the suit afresh accordingly within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order. 9. The Second Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. Direct service is permitted to both the parties.