DHIKAJLAL PANACHAND Vs. HORMUSJI EDULJI BOTTLEWALLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We are of opinion that having regard to the summons and what is therein stated it was not open to the plaintiff to obtain a decree before the returnable date. We think that this conclusion is not only required by the terms of the summons but is in accordance with the provisions of the Code with which the Rules are consistent in this respect. At the same time the plaintiff has followed a course which has been permitted by the office for a great number of years and it would be hard to cast upon him costs of this appeal.

(2.) So the order we make as to the costs will be that all costs of the suit and appeal up to this date, including the costs of the motion, will be costs in the cause as between the plaintiff and defendants 4 and 5.

(3.) We set aside the decree that has been passed against defendants 4 and 5.