BABULAL Vs. RAJ KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Though the respondents have been served, the second respondent has filed a photocopy of the Power of Attorney on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 and 3 to 6 but when the Registry directed him to produce the original he failed to do the same. He is also not present in the Court. One Shyam Lal, son of Prabhu Lal Kayasth had laid the suit for specific performance; the Civil Judge dismissed the suit but on appeal No. 16/1973 by judgment and decree dated October 18, 1973, the suit was decreed as under:

(3.) In the suit there was prayer for specific performance with possession of the property in prayer 1 thus: