A.S. Chandurkar, J.

1. Heard. Admit on the following substantial question of law:

Whether the decree passed by the trial Court to the extent it refuses part of the relief to the plaintiff can be altered in exercise of powers under provisions of Order 41, Rule 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure in absence of any cross objections by the plaintiff.

1-A. In view of order dated 21-4-2014, the learned Counsel for the parties have been heard on aforesaid substantial question of law.

2. The appellant is the original defendant No. 1 against whom the respondent Nos. 1 and 2/plaintiffs had filed suit for declaration that the sale deed dated 8-1-1990 executed by their father-defendant No. 2 in favour of the defendant No. 1 was by practicing fraud and hence not binding on them. Further prayer of permanent injunction was also made by the plaintiffs. The trial Court granted relief of permanent injunction. However, the relief to the extent of declaration that the sale deed in question was obtained by practicing fraud was refused.

3. The defendant No. 1 being aggrieved by aforesaid decree challenged the same by filing appeal under section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the Code). Th