1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.1358 OF 2005 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3208 OF 1995 Abbas Mohamad Mujawar Since Deceased by legal heirs 1 Taj Abbas Mujawar Since Deceased 1(A) Sugrabi Taj Mujawar & Ors. ...Appellants. v. Mahamed Husen Nabisaheb Mujawar Since deceased by his legal heirs 1 Illshibax Mahamad Husen Mujawar & Ors. ...Respondents. Mr. Y.A.Sakhare i/by M/s. YKS Legal, adv. For the Appellants. Ms. S.V.Sonawane, AGP For the Respondent Nos.10 and 11. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : 25th August , 2009 P.C. 1 Heard. This Second Appeal is filed against the compromise decree passed in Regular Civil Appeal No.137 of 1988 on 30/9/1994 on the basis of compromise to which present appellant/original defendant no.3 was not a party. On perusal of the record, it appears that after the original plaintiff Mahamed Husen, his ten legal heirs were brought on record in the suit. They were all appellants in the Regular Civil Appeal No.137 of 1988. However, in the present appeal, out of these appellants, appellants nos.1/5, 6,7,8,9 and 10 are not even made parties in the 2 present appeal. Besides that the appellant no.1/3 in the first appeal was shown as respondent no.1/3 in the present appeal. Present appeal was dismissed as against the respondent no.1/3 by order dated 22.10.2007. In view of this compromise decree in favour of the said respondent no.1/3 and the above referred five appellants in the First Appeal has become final and it has not been challenged. In view of this, this appeal can not proceed particularly when in the decree passed by the First Appellate Court, all the plaintiffs/appellants therein were declared to have rights in the suit property. In view this, even if the present appeal succeeds in respect of the present respondents, there will be conflicting decisions in respect of present respondents and those parties, who were not impleaded in the present appeal. Therefore, in my opinion, whole of the appeal is liable to be dismissed on this very ground. 2 For the aforesaid reasons, Second Appeal stands dismissed. As the Second Appeal is dismissed, Civil Application No.3208 of 1995 does not survive and stands disposed off accordingly. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)