(1.) This was a suit for rent against several defendants. One of these defendants was dead before the service of summons. The fact of the death was brought to the notice of the Court and there was an application to bring in his heirs. No further steps were taken by the Court and a decree was passed against the deceased defendant as if he were living.
(2.) In the second Court the alleged heirs of the deceased Madan Jha were brought in as defendants and there it was contended that they had been brought in after the expiry of the period allowed by law, that the application for substitution was, therefore, barred by limitation and that the whole suit ought to fail. The learned District Judge gave effect to this plea although the only part of the case that was under appeal before him was a fraction of the claim relating to certain muafi.
(3.) The learned Judge was wrong in dismissing the whole suit. One of the defendants was not brought in time and the whole suit has been dismissed although a part only of the suit was under appeal before him.