JUDGMENT B.D. Agarwal, J. - The chief question raised before the lower appellate court was whether the subsequent vendee had notice of the prior agreement dated 1/2nd March, 1959, upon which the plaintiff appellant relied. The court below has, upon a consideration of the evidence of both sides at length, came to the finding that the alleged oral notice to the subsequent vendee is not established. This court in second appeal does not enter into the reappraisal of the evidence. No perversity is shown to exist in the assessment made by the Lower appellate court. In sofar as the stand taken by me vendor, namely, Smt. Jwala Devi in her written statement is concerned, there could be no reliance placed upon the same by the plaintiff-appellant against the subsequent vendee for the reason that Smt. Jwala Devi was not produced as a witness and there was no opportunity to the respondents to cross-examine her on the point. 2. In view of the above, no substantial question of law does arise. The appeal is dismissed under Order 41 Rule 11 C.P.C.