JUDGMENT : Suman Shyam, J. Heard Mr. P.K. Deka, learned counsel for the appellants. I have also heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel representing the respondents. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 03.03.2016 passed by the Court of learned Civil Judge No. 2, Silchar in Misc. Case No. 37/2013 arising out of Title Appeal No. 12/1995. 3. It appears that the Title Appeal No. 12/1995 was earlier dismissed for non-prosecution by order dated 19.07.2013 The appellants herein, who are the appellants in Title Appeal No. 12/1995, had preferred an application under Order XLI Rule 19 of the CPC with a prayer for re-admission of the appeal. By the order dated 03.03.2016, the learned Lower Appellate Court had dismissed the said application on the grounds mentioned in the aforesaid order. 4. It appears that one of the grounds on which the prayer for readmission of the appeal was rejected by the learned Court below is that the appellants had failed to take steps for service of notice upon the respondent No. 17(d). 5. Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel, has entered appearance on behalf of the said respondent No. 17(d), who is also impleaded as the respondent No. 17(d) in the present appeal and submits that she would have no objection if the Title Appeal is re-admitted to hearing by the Lower Appellate Court subject to the condition that the Title Appeal be proceeded expeditiously. Ms. Choudhury submits that vokalatanama on behalf of the respondent No. 17(d) will be filed before the Lower Appellate Court on the next date fixed. 6. In view of the submission made by Ms. Choudhury, I am of the view that it would not be necessary for this Court to enter into any of the contentious issues raised in the appeal. This appeal, therefore, stands allowed by setting aside the impugned order dated 03.03.2016 Title Appeal No. 12/1995 would stand restored to its original file. The learned Lower Appellate Court may now proceed to hear the appeal in accordance with law. 7. The LCR be sent back. 8. The parties to appear before the Court below on 02.05.2018 9. This appeal is accordingly disposed of.