ORDER

1. These appeals are directed against the final judgment and decree of a Single Judge of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in RFAs Nos. 40 and 188 of 1989 which have been disposed of by the common judgment dated 16-12-1998. By the impugned judgment, the High Court has reversed the well-reasoned judgment of the trial court without setting aside the findings recorded by the trial court.

2. A court of first appeal can reappreciate the entire evidence and come to a different conclusion. In the present case, we find that the High Court has not adverted to many of the findings which had been recorded by the trial court. For instance, while dismissing the suits filed by the respondents, the trial court had recorded a finding on Issue 5 that the defendant-appellant had taken actual possession of the suit properties in Execution Petition No. 137 of 1980 arising out of as No. 224 of 1978. Without reversing this finding, the High Court simply allowed the appeals and decreed the suits filed by the plaintiff-respondents in toto. Similarly, there are other issues on which findings recorded by the trial court have not been set aside by the High Court. The points involved in the appea