PER CURIAM.
After our decision in the above cause, 113 A.2d 734, the complainants asked for and received permission to file a motion for reargument. The motion sets out certain testimony to the effect that the removal of the deed restriction would not "seriously affect" the value of the Clauberg property. It was and is our judgment that such indefinite testimony should not be conclusive, since the cause was tried on an entirely different theory which is fully set forth in our opinion.
Motion denied.