RATAN LAL Vs. HEERA LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD.

(2.) THE appeal arises out of a decision of a suit instituted by the learned on the basis of second default. In this appeal, in fact, to determine whether any substantial question of law arises in this appeal requires a journey through the facts.

(3.) I have considered the rival submissions. The order of determination of rent and order of striking of the defence was not challenged before the regular first appellate court. The memo of first appeal was referred for confirmation. In the prayer, in the appeal, there is no mention of these orders. Copy of these orders have not been filed on the record of this second appeal, therefore, it cannot be considered that any challenge is sustainable at the instance of the learned counsel for the appellant in second appeal against these two orders. It is also noteworthy that there is no prayer in the prayer clause of second appeal against there orders. Once the order of determination of rent is upheld and striking of the defence is also not interfered, then what remains to be seen is whether the appellant can be permitted to urge that the suit could not have been decree without establishing that there was a second default?