JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
Though the appellants had lodged no less than 16 grounds of appeal, their counsel Mr. Gautama, abandoned all other grounds of appeal contained in the Memorandum of appeal and the Amended Memorandum of Appeal and focused his submission before us on the alleged defects in the judgment and the resultant decree which he contended were bad in law for failing to comply with the mandatory provisions of Order 20 Rules 4 and 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
The genesis of the dispute giving rise to this appeal is contained in the plaint lodged in the superior court on 21st April, 1999. It is averred that at all material times the 1st appellant was a shareholder and director in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th appellants and the respondent companies. By an Agreement dated 19th December, 1997, the 2nd appellant sold to the respondent a tourist business known as Big Simba Camp together with the remainder of the lease over Title Number CIS MARA/TALEK/153, plus the goodwill and all assets speci…