Sreenivas Harish Kumar, J.—The appellants’ are the legal representatives of the original defendant in O.S. No. 216/2005, on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Belagavi. The respondent being the plaintiff in the said suit sought specific performance of the agreement dated 21.4.2002 executed by the original defendant. Suffice it to state that in the suit, the plaintiff himself adduced evidence as PW1. Defendants’ counsel cross-examined him. Thereafter, the plaintiff examined another witness, Sadanand Patil as PW2 and the defendants’ counsel did not cross-examine him; even the legal representatives of the defendant (referred to as ‘defendants’ hereafter for convenience) who were brought on record remained absent, and they did not lead evidence from their side also. After the suit was reserved for judgment, the defendants got filed applications for re-opening of the case and recalling PW2 for cross-examination. The trial Judge dismissed these applications and decreed the suit by his judgment and decree dated 18.11.2010.

2. The defendants preferred an appeal RA No. 4/2011 to the District Court, Belagavi. In this appeal, in addition to challenging the trial Court’s decr