JUDGMENT

1. These eleven appeals arise out of as many suits u/s 105, B.T. Act for settlement of fair and equitable rent of the grounds of additional area, the present rents being lower than the prevailing rate, and rise in the price of staple food crops.

2. The facts are that the appellant along with five others form the entire body of landlords and the suits were purported to have been brought by and on behalf of all these persons. Kiranbala Devi was plaintiff No. 5 and the appellant, Kali Charan Singha, plaintiff No. 6. The suits proceeded to a hearing and a large number of witnesses were examined and a large number of documents filed on behalf of the plaintiffs. While the defendants' case was in progress Kiranbala who was described as plaintiff No. 5 filed an application on the 8th September 1920 to have her name 'struck out' from the category of the plaintiffs on the ground that the suits were not instituted with her knowledge and consent and that she did not want to prosecute the suits. This application in spite of the other plaintiffs' objection was granted and Kiranbala's name was ordered to be removed from the category of the plaintiffs. The other plaintiffs then applied to m