12 It could be seen that the plaintiff has stated in his plaint that it was only an oral exchange of properties and when he himself has admitted that it is only an oral exchange, why the lower Appellate Court remanded the matter back to the lower Court to decide the issue as per the documents. Regarding the partition deed, the same has been produced by the defendants as Ex-B1 and as per the same, the defendants got title for the property, which need not be decided again by the lower Court as the same has been dealt and decided by the lower Court and has come to the conclusion that the plaintiff is not entitled for the relief prayed for. It could also be seen from the pleadings that the plaintiff has valid title for the property but same has not proved by the plaintiff. Only with the available materials, the issue could be decided. Since the entire plaint is only based on the oral exchange deed, which has been denied, the claim based on the oral exchange is decided only with the available materials by the lower appellate Court itself and the lower Appellate Court ought not to have remanded the matter to the lower Court. If at all any additional evidence should be produced, the same could be taken up by the lower appellate Court itself and decided the issue fresh if it is feel so. This Court is of the opinion that if further documents are necessary to decide the issue, the same can be filed by the parties before the lower Appellate Court itself within a time frame and the same can be decided.
