In order to appreciate the short companytroversy involved in this appeal, few relevant facts need mention hereinbelow.
The respondents felt aggrieved and filed first appeal before the District Judge, Pune.
The appellant plaintiff felt aggrieved and filed second appeal before the High Court.
44 of Signature Not Verified 2017 whereby the High Court dismissed the second Digitally signed by ANITA MALHOTRA Date 2019.01.31 165804 IST Reason appeal filed by the appellant herein.
The respondents filed their written statement and denied the appellants claim.
By judgment decree dated 10.11.2016, the first Appellate Court allowed the respondents defendants appeal and dismissed the suit.
The Trial Court by judgment decree dated 05.07.2004 decreed the appellants suit and passed a decree for specific performance of the companytract against the respondents.
The said suit was based on an agreement dated 08.08.1984.
By impugned order, the High Court dismissed the second appeal holding that the appeal does number involve any substantial question of law as is required to be made out under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 hereinafter referred to as the Code which has given rise to filing of the present appeal by way of special leave by the plaintiff in this Court.
The appellant is the plaintiff whereas the respondents are the defendants in the civil suit out of which this appeal arises.
The appellant filed a civil suit against the respondents for specific performance of the companytract in relation to the suit property.
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. Leave granted.
This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 06.08.2018 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Second Appeal No.
