FAO (Ord.) 481 of 2007. 11.1.2008 Present: Mr. R.L.Chaudhary, counsel for the appellants. Heard learned counsel for the appellants. One of the grounds urged by the appellants before the Court below was that the delay in filing the application for bringing on record the legal representatives of the deceased appellant No. 1 Ramesh was caused because of the negligence of counsel. Learned counsel states that this has not been considered by the learned appellate Court. It is also submitted that the appeal does not abate as a whole, as there was adequate representation of the estate of deceased Ramesh. I do not find that this point has been discussed in the order. If what learned counsel for the appellants submits is the true state of affairs, the remedy of the appellants would be to approach the appellate Court by way of a review petition to review its order, as it would not be appropriate for this Court to controvert the judgment on points of fact which are not apparent on the judgment. This appeal is accordingly disposed of with these directions. Liberty is reserved to the appellant to approach the appellate Court in accordance with law. All pending applications shall stand disposed of. January 11, 2008 (PC). (Dev Darshan Sud), J.