Non-party locus to appeal requires direct and substantial prejudice from the decree, not a remote or unchallenged claim.

A non-party may seek leave to appeal under the Code of Civil Procedure only if the decree directly and substantially affects that person's legal rights. The text explains that a decree confined to the parties to the suit, and not operating in rem, does not by itself confer locus on strangers to the proceedings. It further notes that the appellants' claimed interests arose from sale deeds executed under a general power of attorney, which were not challenged in the suit and did not form part of the decree. On that basis, no material showed any adverse effect on their rights, so they were not persons aggrieved.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants, who were not parties to the suit, could be treated as aggrieved persons entitled to seek leave to appeal against the decree passed in the suit.

Analysis: The right of appeal under the Code of Civil Procedure is available to a person whose legal rights are affected by the decree. A non-party may seek leave to appeal only if the decree binds him or prejudicially affects him in a direct and substantial manner. The suit in question concerned cancellation and declaration regarding agreements to sell and an injunction against the society and its officers. The appellants' asserted rights stemmed from sale deeds executed on the basis of a general power of attorney, which were neither challenged in the suit nor formed the subject matter of the decree. The decree was not one in rem and operated only between the parties to the suit. No material was shown to establish that the decree adversely affected the appellants' legal rights.

Conclusion: The appellants were not persons aggrieved and had no locus to maintain an appeal or seek leave to appeal against the decree.

---