AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This is an appeal from the decision of the District Judge of Bakurgunj. The Plaintiff sued for rent. In the ninth paragraph of his plaint, he set out that the Defendants, Nos. 2 to 6, who are part owners with him, have declined to join in the suit, though repeatedly asked to do so. Therefore, of the cases cited before us the only case which has a bearing on the present suit is that of Tarini Kant Lahiri v. Nund Kishore Patranovis 12 C.L.R. 588. There was no issue as to whether that statement was true of false.
The argument now is that because those part owners who it was asserted had refused to join, did not join in the suit, the suit was rightly dismissed. We can find no authority for such a proposition. We therefore set aside the decree of the District Judge, and send the case back to him to he tried on its merits. We make no order as to costs.