Rajendra Nath Mittal, J. - (1.) THIS judgment will dispose of C.M. No. 3037 -C of 1983 in R.S.A. No. 186 of 1976, R.S.A. No. 186 of 1976, C.M. No. 3036 -C of 1983 in R.S.A. No. 971 of 1977 and R.S.A. No. 971 of 1977, as they involve the common question of law and fact.
(2.) THE facts in the judgment are being given from R.S.A. No. 186 of 1976. Briefly, the facts are that Khem Chand sold the land in dispute in favour of Defendants Nos. 1 to 4 vide sale -deed dated 18th August, 1970, for a consideration of Rs. 18,000/ - The Plaintiffs instituted a suit for possession by pre -emption on the ground that they were the tenants on the land The suit was contested by Defendants Nos. 1 to 4 who denied the allegations of the Plaintiffs. The trial Court dismissed the suit On appeal by the Plaintiffs, the appellate Court affirmed the judgment of the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. They have come up in second appeal to this Court. During the pendency of the appeal, Gugan and Jamani Sahai, Appellants Nos. 1 and 4 died on 20th November, 19 9, and 6th March, 1983, respectively, leaving behind their legal representatives
(3.) THE legal representatives of the deceased Appellants filed C.M. No. 3037 -C of 1983 under Order 22, Rules 3 and 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to bring them on record as Appellants, on 25th November, 1983. It is stated in the application that they did not know about the pendency of the appeal and therefore, they could not file the application within limitation. The application is contested by Mr. Sarin who has urged that the applicants knew about the appeal and the plea taken by them is an after thought.;