1. The revision petitioners are the defendants in a suit for specific performance filed by the respondent. Suit, was compromised and decree was passed on 24/02/2000. Subsequently, alleging fraud and coercion as also challenging the competence of the Power of Attorney, of the plaintiff to enter into a compromise, the defendants filled IA No. 3587/2000 dated 04.8.2000, under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Sections 114 and 151 of the Civil Procedure Code. The plaintiff filed objections. Subsequently, on advise, the defendants filed a memo stating

“the petitioners beg to withdraw I.A.No.3587/00 as the same is not maintainable in law and the petitioners are today filing an interlocutory application under the proper provisions of law”.

The said memo was recorded and the IA was closed on 24/01/2001. On 25/01/2001 another I.A. was filed seeking the very same reliefs, but however, invoking the power of the Court under the proviso to R.3 of O.23. That was rejected holding that, the earlier I.A was withdrawn; without reserving liberty, and the subsequent application cannot be entertained by reason of the specific bar under O.23 R.1.

2. The counsel for the revision petitioner Sri N. Subram