Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree of dismissal dated 2nd December, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as the impugned judgment) passed by Hon'ble Single Judge in C.S. No. 643 of 1990, the plaintiff/appellant has preferred this appeal.

2. Plaintiff/appellant filed the suit against Karuna Gupta and her son Samir Kumar Gupta as defendants nos. 1 and 2 respectively for specific performance of contract by the said Karuna Gupta on the basis of a written agreement dated, August 13, 1988 between Karuna Gupta and the plaintiff for sale of the premises No. 12F, Nather Bagan Street, Calcutta. The said defendants filed separate written statements.

3. During pendency of the suit in the First Court, Karuna Gupta died on 5th November, 1995 and the plaintiff, upon amendment of plaint, stated that the then defendant No. 2, Samir Kumar Gupta was her sole heir and legal representative. On 7th September, 2007, the said suit was decreed ex parte in favour of the plaintiff on the belief that a fresh notice as per the direction of the Court was given to the said defendant Samir Kumar Gupta but none turned up on behalf of the defendant. The plaintiff, as decree-holder, filed