(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit brought on June 29tb, 1910, by the appellants upon a mortgage made on October 29th, 1873, in favour of two out of four brothers who were joint in estate. The plaintiffs-appellants are the thirteen sons of the four brothers. The defendants-respondents, in their written statement filed on September 25th, 1910, objected that the eleven sons of the plaintiffs should have been made parties to the suit, and that in their absence, the suit could not be maintained. The Munsif dismissed the suit holding that it was too late to make the sons of the plaintiffs parties to the suit. On appeal, the Additional District Judge took the same view.
(2.) First Appeal from Order No. 98 of 1911 arises out of a suit brought on August 6th, 1910, upon a mortgage made on December 14th, 1830, in favour of one Chet Ram. The plaintiffs were the two surviving sons and the son of a deceased son of Chet Ram, Objection was taken on September 6th, 1910, that the three sons of the first and second plaintiffs should have been made parties to the suit. The sons were then made plaintiffs. The Munsif dismissed the suit but on appeal the Additional Subordinate Judge held that the sons were not necessary parties and remanded the suit for trial on the merits.
(3.) First Appeal from Order No. 50 of 1911 arises out of a suit brought on August 1st, 1910, upon a mortgage made on August 6th, 1868 in favour of one Adit Dyal. The plaintiffs were two of the sons and the son of a deceased son of Adit Dyal. Objection was taken on September 12th, 1910, that the two sons of the first plaintiff and the son of second plaintiff were necessary parties, and they were then made defendants. The Munsif dismissed the suit. On appeal the District Judge held that the suit was maintainable and he remanded it for trial on the merits.