Heard Counsels appearing for the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant invited my attention to the grounds taken in the second appeal and submitted that all the grounds No.I to XV would form substantial questions of law for consideration in this Second Appeal. The learned Counsel submitted that the Trial Court as well as the Lower Appellate Court failed to frame specific point about the limitation for filing the suit. It is submitted that the suit which was filed by the plaintiffs was not within limitation. It is further submitted that the plaintiffs have not brought on record the legal representatives of deceased Sakhubai W/o Bhimaji Kharat, though she died during the pendency of the Regular Civil Appeal filed by the appellant herein. It is submitted that said Sakhubai died on 13th November, 1997. The suit was filed on 30th November, 1992 and appeal filed by the appellant herein came to be allowed in the year 2001. It is further submitted that agreement for sale which was executed on 25th January, 1954, was proved by defendant No.1 i.e. appellant herein, by examining the witness by name Balwant Kulkarni, who specifically stated that on 25th January, 1954, the agre