Choudhary, J.

1. This application by defendant No. 4 arises out of a suit instituted by the plaintiff-Opposite Party No. 1 on the basis of a handnote alleged to have been executed by Kamdeo, since deceased, father of the petitioner, on the 15th of November, " 1946, in the name of defendant No. 5, who is opposite party No. 2, on the allegation that the plaintiff was the real beneficiary under the hand note as the money was advanced by him and that defendant No. 5 was merely his benamidar. Defendant no. 5 did not file any written statement, but gave evidence in the suit on, behalf of the plaintiff and supported his claim. The suit was contested by the petitioner on various grounds one of which with which only we are concerned in this application was that it was not maintainable at the instance of the plaintiff. It was contended that the plaintiff, not being the holder of the handnote, could not sue on it, and no decree could be passed in his favour even though the person, in whose name the handhotes stood, was made a party to the suit and he supported the claim of the plaintiff. A question was also raised with regard to the liability of defendants 1 to 3 who are the other mem