MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J. -- Both the learned counsel for the parties have agreed that the suit to the extent of Sadiq, respondent No. 2, was correctly decreed. However, the suit with regard to the appellants could not be decreed for the simple reason that the statement given by one of the defendants, is not binding upon the others. Counsel appearing before the Trial Court on behalf of the appellants on 12.4.1975, was not the actual counsel, rather he was appearing on behalf of the original counsel, therefore, he could not make any statement binding the appellants.
2. I agree with the learned counsel for the respondents that with regard to Sadiq, respondent No. 2, suit had been rightly decreed. However, regarding the appellants, the Courts below have committed material irregularity.
3. With the agreement of both the parties, this case Is remanded back to the Trial Court with the direction to decide the case afresh on all issues confining to the appellants and excluding Sadiq, respondent No. 2, who has made an admission in this case. Consequently, this appeal is accepted, judgments and decrees of both the Courts below to the extent of appellants, are set aside and the case is remanded to the Trial Court with the above direction to decide it on merits.