R.S.A No. 2225 of 2007 (O&M) ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A No. 2225 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision : September 22, 2009 Om Parkash, ...... Appellant (s) v. Ram Kalan and others, ...... Respondent(s) *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI *** Present : Mr. N.D. Achint, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. G.P.Singh, Advocate for the respondents. *** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? *** AJAY TEWARI, J (Oral) This appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court reversing that of the trial Court and thereby dismissing the suit of the appellant for specific performance. The lower appellate Court held on fact that the agreement to sell was not proved. The following questions have been proposed :- “ i) Whether the decree and judgment rendered by learned trial Court on 4.10.2006 operates as res judicata against the respondent Ram Kalan and other respondent R.S.A No. 2225 of 2007 (O&M) ::2:: except respondent Smt. Basanti and Dariyo singh who did not file any appeal and the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court has attained finality against the respondents ? ii) Whether the judgment and decree passed by the learned appellate Court is against law as it is based on no findings ? iii) Whether the learned appellate Court has traveled beyond pleading holding that the subsequent vendees were bona fide purchasers ?” As regards question no. (i) is concerned, Order XLI Rule 4 of the CPC reads as under :- “ 4. One of several plaintiffs or defendants may obtain reversal of whole decree where it proceeds on ground common to all.- Where there are more plaintiffs or more defendants than one in a suit, and the decree appealed from proceeds on any ground common to all the plaintiffs or to all the defendants, any one of the plaintiffs or of the defendants may appeal from the whole decree, and thereupon the Appellate Court may reverse or vary the decree in favour of all the plaintiffs or defendants, as the case may be.” In this view of the matter, question No. (i) has to be held against the appellant. As regards question No. (ii) is concerned, the same does not arise. In respect of question No. (iii), once the agreement has not been proved, this question loses any significance. R.S.A No. 2225 of 2007 (O&M) ::3:: Consequently, this appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. As the main appeal has since been dismissed, all the pending civil miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) September 22, 2009. JUDGE `kk'