JUDGMENT : TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN, J. CMP (M) No. 459 of 2019 1. The applicant/appellant appears to have filed this application, as a matter of abundant caution, as the appeal is within limitation, in case the limitation period is calculated from the date of passing of the order dated 18.03.2019 in RSA No. 174 of 2013, whereby the applicant/appellant was permitted to withdraw the regular second appeal which was filed by him bonafidely with liberty to file the present appeal with a clear stipulation that the time spent in pursuing the regular second appeal will not come in the way of availing the remedy of filing first appeal. Accordingly, the application is allowed. The delay, if any, in filing of the first appeal is condoned. Application stands disposed of. Appeal be registered. FAO No. 153 of 2019 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is taken up for final hearing. 3. At the outset, it would be relevant to extract the operative portion of the judgment passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Mandi, which reads thus:- "23. For the reasons recorded herein above while discussing point nos. 1 and 2, the present appeal is ordered to be allowed and the application U/O 26 Rule 9 C.P.C. is hereby dismissed and as such, the impugned judgment and decree passed by the ld. Trial Court in Civil Suit No. 71 of 2007 dated 29-10-2011 is hereby set-aside. The case is remanded back to the Ld. Trial Court to take reply/written statement of the plaintiff to the counter claim and thereafter to frame issue and to afford an opportunity to both the parties to lead their evidence to this extent only and thereafter to decide the suit afresh in accordance with law. The parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the ld. Trial Court on 3-12-2012. Decree sheet be drawn up accordingly." 4. The parties are ad idem that in fact there was no counter-claim filed by the defendant. Therefore, there was no question of the case being remanded back to the learned trial Court to take reply/written statement of the plaintiff to the counter-claim and thereafter frame issues. 5. Accordingly, the judgment passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Mandi, on 23.11.2012, as impugned herein in this appeal, is ordered to be set aside. 6. Therefore, there was no question of the case being remanded back to the learned trial Court to take reply/written statement of the plaintiff to the counter-claim and thereafter frame issues. 5. Accordingly, the judgment passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Mandi, on 23.11.2012, as impugned herein in this appeal, is ordered to be set aside. 6. The parties through their counsels are directed to appear before the learned first appellate Court on 13.05.2019. 7. The appeal stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. 8. In view of the disposal of the appeal, pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.