Heard the Counsel on record.

2. The learned Counsel representing the appellants – defendants 19 to 21 had taken this Court through the respective pleadings of the parties, the evidence available on record, the findings recorded by the trial Court and also the specific grounds raised in the Grounds of Appeal and would maintain that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the findings recorded by the trial Court being unsustainable, the said findings are to be disturbed and the appeal to be allowed. The learned Counsel also would maintain that the trial Court totally erred in decreeing the suit for specific performance on the strength of the alleged agreement of sale – Ex.A.1, dt.20-6-1977. The Counsel also would maintain that in the absence of any evidence whatsoever, the trial Court ought not to have recorded a finding that the property had fallen to the share of D.1 in the partition effected between D.1 and the deceased D.2. The learned Counsel also pointed out to several of the circumstances which would clearly go to show that this property in fact had fallen to the share of the deceased-2nd defendant. The Counsel would further maintain that the present appellants a