MONMOHAN PANDAY Vs. BIDHU BHUSAN RAY CHOWDHURY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We think that the preliminary objection taken to the hearing of the appeal must prevail.

(2.) The appeal arises out of a suit to recover money on a hatchitta executed by two persona, named Upendra Nath Banerjee and another, as managing partners of the Calcutta Hosiery" in favour of Ray Chowdhury and brothers. The suit was instituted, however, by Bidhu Bhusan and several other persons as plaintiffs. In the plaint the description of the plaintiffs was--"The proprietors and maliks of the firm styled: Ray Chowdhury brothers," and then the names of the plaintiffs were mentioned. The Court below gave a decree to the plaintiffs and in the decree the names of Bidhu Bhusan and other persons were described as the plaintiffs without the addition of the words that they were maliks of the firm of Ray Chowdhury Brothers. After the appeal had been filed in this Court, one of the plaintiffs, Dakhina Ranjan, died and his legal representatives were not substituted within the time allowed by law.

(3.) It appears that an application was made out of time and that a Rule was issued to show cause why the substitution should not be made though out of time. The Rule, however, was discharged, the result being that the appeal was dismissed as against one of the plaintiffs, the deceased Dakhina Ranjan.