Ramratna Singh, J.

1. This appeal by the defendants arises out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 41,500/-, said to have been advanced through hundis and bank drafts to a firm known as Ram Sahay Mall Rameshwar Dayal (Defendant No. 1), besides compensation at 1 per cent per month from the different dates, respectively, of the hundis and the bank drafts. The case of the plaintiff, as made out at the time of hearing, was that the said amount was advanced as loan. It was further alleged that defendants 2 to 7 were members of a joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshra School of Hindu Law, and the said firm Ram Sahay Mall Rameshwar Dayal, which is located at Konch in Uttar Pradesh, belonged to them. Defendants 8 and 9, who are alleged to belong to another joint Hindu family, are said to be partners, along with the aforesaid defendants 2 to 7, of an Ice Factory for which the loan in question is alleged to have been advanced.

2. Defendants 1, 5 and 8 filed one written statement, and denied all the allegations made by the plaintiff. They said that the plaintiff negotiated with these defendants to be a partner in their Ice Factory and also to start a grain business in partnership. It