Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.- The defendants-appellants, being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree dated 12th of March, 1975 passed by the 5th Additional Subordinate Judge, Muzaffarpur in Money Suit Nos. 30 of 71/10 of 74, have preferred this appeal.

2. It appears that I.A. No. 2938 of 2010 was filed by original respondent no. 2, who had been shown as a minor under the guardianship of his mother, i.e., the original Respondent No.1, with a prayer to allow him to defend the appeal as major and he be also substituted in place of respondent no.1. However, since respondent no. 1 had died, another I.A. No. 908 of 2008 was filed for that purpose and was allowed with a direction to expunge her name, it was confined only to the extent that respondent no. 2 be directed to defend his appeal as major and the interlocutory & application was disposed of vide order no. 21 dated 6.9.2010. However, it appears that necessary correction was not made by the office with respect to the concerned respondent in the memorandum of appeal which still shows that the concerned respondent, is under the guardianship of his mother, Malti Devi, i.e., the Original Respondent No.1, who had died