GANGANATH JHA Vs. SHASHI NATH JHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The main appeal stood dismissed on the 30th September, 1963, for non-compliance of an order dated the 31st July, 1963. The cross-objection has only survived for consideration.

(2.) The cross-objectors were two, (1) Shashi Nath Jha and (2) his minor son Bibhutinath Jha, who were plaintiffs in the suit and respondents in the appeal. There was no vakalatnama for cross-objector No. 2 and consequently this Court by its order dated the 7th November, 1963, ordered the cross-objection to be deemed to be on behalf of cross-objector No. 1 only. The cross-objection is thus now only on behalf of plaintiff-respondent No. 1.

(3.) Before I go into the merits of the cross-objection the first point, which requires consideration is as to whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the provisions of Order 41, Rules 4 and 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure, hereinafter to be referred to as the Code, apply mutatis mutandis to the cross-objection. This question has assumed importance in this case because of the fact that the cross-objection is now only on behalf of one of the plaintiffs, though the impugned decree had proceeded on a ground common to both the plaintiffs. If the provisions of Order 41, Rules 4 and 33 do not apply to cross-objections, there may be conflicting decree as between the said two plaintiffs. The cross-objection by one of the plaintiffs only would then fail.