1. The Second Appeal arises from a suit for perpetual injunction restraining trespass. The suit was dismissed by the trial court and the decree was confirmed in appeal. The plaintiff-appellant appears to have filed an application for amendment of the plaint in the appellate court. When the appeal was dismissed for default that application also happened to be dismissed. Subsequently the appeal was restored to file and was disposed of on merits without adverting to the application for amendment The plaintiff-appellant has therefore raised before this court the following questions:

1. Whether the lower appellate court was justified in dismissing the amendment application solely on the ground that the appeal was once dismissed for default?

2. Whether the lower appellate court has acted illegally in not restoring the amendment application after the appeal was restored on file?

2. The learned counsel for the appellant, placing reliance on the decision in Shivaraya v. Sharnappa, AIR 1968 Mysore 283 and Rami Reddi v. Padma Reddy, AIR. 1978 A.P. 30 contended that once the appeal was restored to file the interlocutory application also stood revived and the court below should have co