1. The substantial question of law involved, formulated and to be answered in the second appeal preferred by defendant No.1 / his legal representatives is as under: -
'Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court below was justified in holding that the appeal did not abate though the legal representatives of the deceased respondent No.2 - Udayram, were not brought on record?'
[For the sake of convenience, the parties would be referred hereinafter as per their status shown and ranking given in the suit before the trial Court].

2. Original plaintiff - Soni Bai filed a suit for declaration of title, partition and possession stating inter alia that she is entitled for 1/2 share in the suit land and also entitled for possession to that extent over the suit land, which was opposed by defendants - Narayan and Udaylal by filing joint written statement. The trial Court after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record, by its judgment and decree dated 29.04.1980 partly decreed the suit for declaration only holding that the plaintiff is only entitled for 3.56 acres of the suit land. First appeal was preferred by plaintiff - Soni Bai, but during pendency of f