( 1 ) THIS appeal was originally listed for disposal on this day on account of the order made by us on 3rd March, 1989 recording a compromise under Order 23, Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure. On that day, the compromise was accepted in person by the parties concerned who were present in Court. By the detailed order made, which is part of the records now, we had even satisfied ourselves that the person in Court claiming to be the respondent was indeed the respondent. That became necessary in the light of the conduct of the counsel who was appearing originally for the respondent to which also we have made a detailed reference in the order of March 3, 1989. In fact on that day, the learned counsel chose to file a memo of retirement from the case for want of instructions and in the light of the fact that respondent, gowrawwa had engaged another counsel who was present in Court alongwith the respondent when the petition for compromise under Order 23, Rule 4 of the Code of civil Procedure was filed.

( 2 ) IT was thereafter on 7-3-1989 an impleading application was presented, which was numbered as LA. 3, by one Mallappa Banappa Hoonur, purporting to be m