on record as it was filed beyond time. That order was not challenged during the pendency of the suit by the appellant. That apart even the appellant did not lead any evidence. Although the appellant cross examined the respondent PW1, has failed to cross examine the surveyor. No independent evidence was also led on behalf of the appellant. In so far as the substantial question of law at (c) above, the record discloses that it was the appellant who had objected to the report of the Court Commissioner. Thus the appellant cannot now contend that the Courts below have acted with material irregularity in not relying on the report submitted by the Court Commissioner. It is apparent that the appellant cannot be allowed to approprate and reprobate. In so far as the substantial question of law at (b) is concerned, the appellant being the husband of the original defendant no.5 and as her legal representative was already there on record. Thus it is not possible to accept that the suit had abated. On carefully going through the order passed by the learned trial court and the first appellate court, I do not find that the second appeal raises any substantial question of law. The appeal is without any merit and is accordingly dismissed, with no order as to costs.
