- (1.) This is a defective appeal. Defects are notified in the report of the Stamp Reporter. It is reported that the name of the defendant/respondent no.10 mentioned in the certified copy of the decree on appeal does not find place in the cause title of the instant appeal. With regard to the said defect, it is submitted by Mr. Manna, learned advocate appearing for the appellants that the defendant/respondent no.10 viz. Kanai Bag died during the pendency of the appeal. His legal heirs were on record. As such, the name of the respondent no.10 was expunged by an order being No. 8 dated 19th June, 2010 passed by the learned first Appellate Court. We, thus, do not find any defect in the memorandum of appeal for not joining the respondent no.10 in this appeal. Stamp Reporter also refers to another defect i.e. the names of the respondent nos. 18 to 22 mentioned in the certified copy of the decree on appeal do not find place in the certified copy of the decree of the learned Trial Court. In this regard, it is submitted by Mr. Manna that those respondents were added as respondents in suit vide order being No. 29 dated 26th April, 2004 passed by the learned Trial Judge. As such, they were impleaded as respondent nos. 18 to 22 in this appeal. We, thus, do not find any defect in the appeal in this regard.
(2.) The other defect mentioned in the Stamp Reporter s report is curable by the learned advocate of the appellants. We grant leave to the learned advocateon-record of the appellants to rectify the said defect in the memorandum of appeal.
(3.) This second appeal is directed against the judgement and decree dated 14th March, 2016 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track 1st Court, Tamluk, Purba Medinipur in Title Appeal No. 02 of 2013 reversing the judgement and decree dated 9th July, 2009 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 3rd Court at Tamluk in Title Suit No. 63 of 2002 at the instance of the plaintiffs/appellants.;