The issues must relate to the main questions in the suit and must be calculated to direct the attention of the parties to those questions. They must be sufficiently specific and should be confined to material facts. Subsidiary matters of fact on which the parties might be at variance ought not to be made the subject matter of an issue as that would be embarrassing. It is no doubt the duty of the Court to frame issues. Should, however, proper issues be not framed, it is up to the parties to move the Court to get proper issues framed. If parties omit to attend to this matter, their default may lead to consequences over which they may not feel comfortable. The parties, however, will not be absolutely concluded by what happens in the trial Court as in appropriate cases, the higher Court in appeal or even in second appeal can and will amend the existing, or add new, issue or issues and remit the same for consideration and finding by the lower Court or remand the entire case for fresh disposal as the facts and circumstances may require. See-'Oolagappa Chetty v. D. Arbuthnot', 1 Ind App. 268 (PC);-'Balagangadhar Tilak v. Sreenivas Pandit', 39 Bom 441 (PC) at pp. 467-468, and - 'The West End Watch Co. v. Berna Watch Co.', 35 Bom 425. The Court below found that the judgments, Exhibits P and XXV, were vitiated by fraud that Ext, XXVIII was also so vitiated and set aside the judgments and the Udampadi. On the question of limitation raised by the defendants, which depended upon the date of birth of the plaintiff, the learned Judge did not record any finding but nevertheless found that the claim
