Birendra Kumar, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short the “C.P.C.) is against the concurrent finding of fact recorded by the learned courts below in a suit for specific performance of contract to execute and register sale deed in respect of immovable property.

3. On 26.11.1987, this Court admitted the appeal for hearing on following substantial questions of law:—

(i) Whether due to absence of plea of willingness in the plaint as well as evidence of plaintiff, the suit is bound to fail?

(ii) Whether the judgments of the Courts below are vitiated in law due to lack of recording a finding on the point of readiness and willingness of the plaintiff to perform his part of the contract?

(iii) Whether the judgment of the lower appellate court is vitiated in law due to absolute non-consideration of the oral evidence of the defendants-appellants, who are twelve in number and those evidences are vital for reaching at a correct conclusion?

During hearing of this appeal, one more question was raised.

(iv) Whether the courts below were consistent with the law that principle of lis pendens would appl