1. The present second appeal will be heard on the following substantial questions of law :

i) Whether the Learned Judge of the First Appellate Court substantially erred in law in holding that the suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties since, as per the defence claim, the suit property was purchased in the name of the President of the defendant-club and, as such, the club itself could not be a necessary party, as well as since the successors of the predecessor-in- interest of the respondents could not have been a necessary party in view of the suit property having been transferred by such predecessor-in-

interest in favour of the appellants’ predecessor?

ii) Whether the Learned First Appellate Judge substantially erred in law in reversing the findings of the Learned Trial Judge as to the title of the plaintiffs/appellants, in view of the plaintiffs/appellants having exhibited transfer deeds in favour of their predecessor-in-interest, thereby