ABDUL HAKIM Vs. ABDUL GANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This action was commenced on a plaint purporting to have bean filed by fifteen persona on behalf of themselves and for all the villagers of Mouza Netra for a declaration of their customary pasture right to the lands in suit and for a declaration of their right to bury their dead in some portion of the same and also for certain consequential reliefs. The learned Munsif dismissed the suit, and the learned Subordinate Judge, on appeal, made a decree in favour of twelve of the plaintiffs; from which the defendants have preferred this appeal.

(2.) The validity of the decree is challenged upon various grounds of which it is necessary to notice only two. The first ground relates to the competency of the suit in view of provisions of Order 1, Rule 8, Civil Procedure Code. The second one is based on the contention that the Maharaja of Tippera was a necessary party to the suit, and in his absence the suit could not proceed.

(3.) With regard to the first ground the position is this. The plaint purported to have been filed by fifteen persons and to have been verified by them and an application on their behalf asking for the leave of the Court under Order 1, Rule 8, Civil Procedure Code necessary for the institution of a representative action was also filed. The Court issued a notice stating that the first plaintiff (who was named) and others (whose names were not given) had instituted the suit and they had bean granted the necessary permission and the said notice was duly advertised. It transpired in the course of the suit that three of the said plaintiffs had neither verified nor signed the plaint and, in fact, one of them deposed as a witness on behalf of the defence. The learned Munsif relied upon this, amongst other grounds, for dismissing the suit. The learned Subordinate Judge ordered the names of the said three persons to be struck out from the plaint, and decreed the suit in favour of the remaining twelve persons as I have stated above.