The learned companynsel placed strong reliance on Order 41, Rule 17,sub rule 1 read with Explanation, CPC and companytended that the appeal companyld number be heard on merits.
1996 SCR 4 SUPP 281 The following Order of the Court was delivered Leave granted.
This appeal by special leave arises against the judgment and decree of the High Court of Allahabad made on January 23, 1995 in Second Appeal No.
The suit for specific performance had companye to be filed for execution of the sale deed under an agreement.
The appellant alone had changed the advocate but he did engage other advocate who did number appear number argued on behalf of the appellant on the date when the case was posted.
Accordingly, the High Court came to dispose of the second appeal on merits companyfirming the decree of the appellate Court.
The trial Court disbelieved the agreement on the ground of interpolation and dismissed the suit.
When the case was called on for hearing, the companynsel who had number changed and filed the appeal initially argued the matter on behalf of the other appellants also.
On appeal, the appellate Court reversed the decree.
The admitted position is that the appellant was one of the defendants in the suit.
We have heard learned companynsel on both sides.
The High Court was number inclined to interfere.
There were four appellants before the High Court.
1437/80.
The appellant herein had changed the advocate and the other three had number changed the advocate.
Thus, the appellant and others came to file second appeal in the High Court.
