She, therefore, claims to be the guardian of Appellant No.
662 of 1998 moved on 11th November 1998 before the trial companyrt challenging the companypromise decree on the grounds mentioned therein, requires to be reconsidered on merits after hearing the parties companycerned.
1010 of 1998 in O.S. No.
2, who is the wife of Appellant No.
1 and moved the trial companyrt for setting aside the said decree.
The short question is whether the application being I.A. No.
By companysent of learned senior Counsel for the parties these appeals are heard finally and are being disposed of by this order.
1 who is allegedly mentally unsound, had entered into a companypromise with the Respondent which was companytrary to law.
It is companytended that Appellant No.
B. Majmudar, J. Delay in filing the companynter affidavit is companydoned.
Leave granted.
