( 1 ) THIS rule is directed against Order No. 68 dt. May 23,1979, passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, 1st Court, Midnapore, in Title Suit No. 46 of 1971. It appears that the said Title Suit was instituted by the plaintiff-petitioner for declaration of title and partition against a number of defendants including the defendant No. 3. The said defendant No. 3 was the mother of the plaintiff and she died on September 8, 1977. Admittedly, no application for substitution of the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased defendant No. 3 was made by the plaintiff within the period of limitation but an application under O. 1, R. 10 of the Civil P C was made by the plaintiff petitioner on April 17, 1973 for bringing the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased defendant No. 3 on record By the impugned order, the learned Judge has held that as the plaintiff failed to make any application for substitution of heirs and legal representatives within the prescribed period of limitation, the suit had abated against the said defendant No. 3 and as the suit was a suit for partition and one of the co-sharers had been left out because of failure to substitute the heirs a