JUDGMENT Chittaiosh Mookerjee. J. We accept the report of the Stamp Reporter that this appeal directed against the order of the learned Judge, Third Bench, City Civil Court. Calcutta refusing to record an alleged compromise is not maintainable at this stage The Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act 1976. having deleted clause (m) of rule 1 of Order 43 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 an order under Rule 3 of Order 23 of the Code recording or refusing to record an agreement, compromise or satisfaction ii no longer appealable under S.104 read with Order 43 Rule 1 of the Code. 2. The appellant cannot contend that this appeal is maintainable by relying upon sub rule (2) of Rule 1A of Order 43 of the Code of Civil Procedure which was inserted by Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act 1976. Under the said sub-rule (2) in an appeal from a decree passed in a suit after recording a compromise or refusing to recorded a compromise, it is open to the appellant to contest the decree on the ground that the compromise should or should not have been recorded. In the instant case although the learned Judge of the court below has refused the prayer of the defendant for recording compromise, he has not yet passed any decree in the suit. If and when an appeal would be preferred against a decree if passed in the suit, the appellant in the said appeal might contest the said decree on the ground that the compromise should have been recorded. This provision in Order 43 Rule 1A of the Code appears. to have been inserted to give effect to the S.105 (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure which infer alia confers right to challenge non-appealable orders in appeal against decree For the foreging reasons, 'we direct that unless the memo of appeal is taken back within two works from date, put up the appeal for final orders. R K. Sharma, J. I agree. Memo of appeal directed to be returned,