B. Amit Sthalekar, J.

Heard Sri Alok Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Sharada Prasad Mishra holding brief of Sri Yogesh Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This is the defendant's second appeal. A suit for specific performance of agreement to sale dated 3.5.2013 was filed by the plaintiff. The suit was decreed by the trial court. Appeal preferred by the defendant-appellant was dismissed.

3. The appeal is admitted on the following question of law :-

A. Whether the judgment and decree of the learned Appellate Court is vitiated inasmuch as the Appellate Court did not frame the point of determination as provided under Order 41, Rule 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure which was mandatory.

4. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant before me today is that the appellate court while dismissing the appeal has not framed any point of determination and has only referred to issues framed by the trial court and thereafter delivered the judgement dismissing the appeal.

5. This fact could not be disputed by Sri Sharada Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the judgement of the Sup