Sanjib Banerjee, J.

1. The applicants in these two matters are defendants in a suit for specific performance filed by the transferor company in a scheme of amalgamation. It appears that notwithstanding the scheme of amalgamation having been allowed and the transferor company therein having been dissolved, the suit has continued in the name of the dissolved transferor company. One set of applicants is the original owner of the immovable property in question; the other set of applicants claims to be the subsequent purchasers of the land. The applicants say that it came to light in course of the cross-examination of the plaintiff's witnesses in the suit pending in the Barasat Court that the plaintiff in that suit had been dissolved and the defendants had thereafter applied for rejection of the plaint or dismissal of the suit. The applicants submit that it was at this stage that the plaintiff in the Barasat suit obtained an adjournment and the erstwhile directors of the transferor company have now applied for recalling the order sanctioning the scheme and, consequently, the order dissolving the transferor company. The applicants suggest that they would be seriously prejudiced if