(1.) This is an appeal from a judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge of Gaya, who, holding that the Secretary of State was a necessary party to a suit for recovery of possession of property on the ground that a certificate and a sale under it had in no way affected the plaintiff's rights Being ab initio null and void, dismissed the suit.
(2.) The appellant maintained and still maintains that so long as he does not seek to set aside the decree or the sale but merely for a declaration that his title and possession are not affected by the decree and the sale, he is entitled to sue without making the Secretary of State a party to the suit.
(3.) It is argued that the ruling in the ease of Gobinda Chandra Shaha V/s. Hemanta Kumari Debi 31 C. 159, does not apply to this case. It appears to us that the plaintiff does not seek to set aside the sale and if it is a matter of indifference to him whether the decree stands or not then that ruling does not apply.