This appeal challenges the validity of the order of the District Judge permitting the first respondent to come on record as a party to the appeal pending before him in A.S.No.324 of 1949. The first respondent purchased the property in dispute which is a house situated in Chingleput town from one of the parties to the suit on 12th October, 1949, between the date of the decree in favour of the third respondent and the filing of the appeal to the District Judge by the aggrieved party. While the appeal was pending in the District Court, the parties entered into a compromise and in consequence thereof, a compromise memo. was filed on 4th January, 1950, which was recorded on the same day. But a decree in terms thereof was not passed immediately for some reason which is not necessary to mention here.

The next day, the first respondent coming to know of this, filed a petition under Order 22, rule 10 for being impleaded as a party to that appeal so that he could attack the genuineness of the compromise. This was opposed by the appellant and the other respondents in the Court below on the ground that he was not entitled to come on record as a party to the appeal and his remedy if an