(1.) The short point involved in the present regular second appeal is whether a pro-note dtd. 15/5/2004, allegedly executed by Jagdev Singh having taken a loan of Rs.2.00 Lacs (an odd amount), which is a partner of the Firm, can be made liable, in the absence of impleadment of legal heirs in the individual capacity, subject to fact that whether Jagdev Singh had undertaken any obligation binding the legal heirs to repay. The answer would be 'No'.
(2.) The plaintiff, in the present case alleged that Jagdev Singh had entered into a pronote, sought the recovery of the amount by arraying the following defendants:-
(3.) From the perusal of the memo of parties of the trial Court, all the defendants are arrayed as partners of the Firm.