10.No doubt, the learned counsel for the respondent sought to rely upon the documents filed by the plaintiff in support of his claim. At this juncture, I would like to point out that any evidence let in without there being any proper pleadings cannot be looked into, unless such material details of such evidence let in is already spoken to by the parties by way of their pleadings. I have already pointed out, the plaintiff failed to refer to the boundaries in the suit schedule. Therefore, in the absence of such specific boundaries referred to in the suit schedule, granting of the decree in favour of the plaintiff by considering the evidence let in by him is not proper, which the lower appellate court has erroneously done. Accordingly, I find that the matter needs to be remitted back to the lower appellate court for fresh consideration of the matter on merits. It is also open to the plaintiff/respondent herein to amend the plaint before the lower appellate court in respect of the boundaries in the suit schedule. Accordingly, the substantial questions of law are answered in terms of the above findings and the second appeal is allowed and the judgment and decree of the lower appellate court is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the lower appellate court for fresh consideration of the appeal on merits and in accordance with law. The plaintiff is also given liberty to amend the plaint before the lower appellate court. Since this appeal is allowed only on the limited ground as discussed supra, it is open to both parties to canvas before the appellate court on all aspects on merits of their respective claim. The lower appellate court shall dispose of the appeal within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
