1. This appeal arises out of a suit to recover rent at the yearly rate of Rs. 10-8. The defendant objected that no more than Rs. 8 could be recovered, and based his objection on the plea of estoppel. His case is that he bought the property at an auction-sale, and in the sale-certificate, the rent was described not as Rs. 10-8 but as Rs. 8 a year. In support of this plea of estoppel the evidence adduced has been, as far as we can see, this certificate and nothing else. Manifestly, the certificate which was subsequent to the sale could not have influenced the conduct of the defendant, or induced him to buy under a misapprehension, as to the rental, and we agree with what the learned Judge, Mr. Justice Lalmohan Doss has said on this point, but we are unable to affirm his order of remand, because it is too late now to adduce evidence on this point. The defendant was not taken by surprise, for this was a point raised by him in his written statement, and if he failed to adduce proper evidence for the purpose of supporting his plea, it would be wrong now in second appeal to send back the case in order that he might adduce evidence on this point. In our opinion, the proper decree to pass is that this appeal must be allowed and the decree of the Munsif restored with costs throughout.