Finer points touching Section 11 and Order II Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short, “the Code”) arise for consideration. In fact, a decision thereon will resolve the issues in this case fully and finally, as the questions of fact are subservient to the legal issues.

2. This appeal arises out of O.S.No.166 of 1994 before the Sub Court, Palakkad. Original appellant was the plaintiff. He died pending the appeal; his legal representatives are additional appellants 2 to 7. The suit is one for specific performance of Ext.A3 contract dated 18.09.1993, executed between the plaintiff and the 1st defendant, for herself and on behalf of her children (defendants 2 to 4), who were minors at that time. This suit was tried by the court below along with O.S.No.164 of 1994. Details regarding O.S.No.164 of 1994 are relevant only for the purpose of considering whether the present suit is hit by the principles in Order II Rule 2 and Section 11 of the Code.

3. Brief facts relevant about O.S.No.164 of 1994 are that it was a suit for prohibitory injunction simplicitor, filed