JUDGMENT :

RAMENDRA JAIN, J.

1. Fresh Vakalatnma filed on behalf of respondents No.1, 3, 4 to 7, 10 to 12 and 14 is taken on record. Respondents No.2, 8, 9 and 13 were earlier represented by Mr. SS Deol, Advocate. But now there is no representation on their behalf. Hence, they are proceeded ex parte.

2. Respondents No.45 to 49 have already been proceeded ex parte vide order dated 12.12.2014.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that only contesting respondents are respondents No.1 to 14, whereas the remaining are proforma respondents. Therefore, their service may be dispensed with.

4. Ordered accordingly.

5. Briefly, the respondents-plaintiff filed a suit for possession of 1/4th share in land measuring 406 kanals 3 marlas detailed in the head note of the plaint against the defendants including the appellant with the alternative relief for permanent injunction to restrain them from alienating the same in any manner whatsoever.

6. The trial Court after holding full-fledged trial, dismissed the suit vide judgment and decree dated 07.11.2012.

7. Being aggrieved, respondents No.1 to 14 approached the First Appellate Court, who while allowing their application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC