BAHORAN Vs. CHANDANDHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HALLIFAX , A.J.C. 1. The only contentions in the petition of appeal to this Court are that the finding as to the number of trees cut and their value is wrong, making the number too great and the value too high, and that there could not be " a joint decree against all the appellants." The first contention was expressly withdrawn, and the second was not argued. In its place was substituted and argument to the effect that the decree should be passed against only those of the defendants who were proved to have taken an actual part in the cutting of the trees. They all conspired to cut the trees, and if some of them got the cutting done by the others they would surely be just as much liable as if each of them had sent out a servant to do his part for him. It may be mentioned also that the plea is hardly a wise one to take on behalf of all the defendants, when it is admitted that some of them are liable; each of those who are liable is altruistically asking for an increase of his own burden.

(2.) THE plea taken on behalf of two of the twenty three appellants is sound, as far as it goes, but its success has no appreciable result. It is probably for that reason that the respondents admitted its validity, though it is raised for the first time in this Court. Ujiyar one of the original defendants died during the trial of the suit, and his two sons Manyar and Mandal were made defendants in his stead. They are not liable in damages for their father's tort unless it is shown that they benefited by it. The decree of the lower appellate Court will accordingly be modified by the removal of the names of Manyar and Mandal from the list of persons responsible for the amount of the damages, leaving the other twenty-one appellants jointly and severally responsible. These twenty-one appellants will also pay all the costs of the respondents in this appeal.