JUDGMENT

George Woodroffe, J. - The facts have been set out in the judgments of the learned Judges of this Court upon whose difference of opinion the matter has been referred to use as also in the judgment of the Subordinate Judge. It is not necessary to repeat them in detail. The suit is by the plaintiff against six defendants. It was dismissed by the Subordinate Judge as against defendants Nos. 5 and 6 and decreed against the defendants Nos. 1 to 4. On appeal to this Court the learned Judges differed and as there was, therefore, no judgment concurring in, varying or reversing the decree appealed from, it was ordered that the decree of the Subordinate Judge be affirmed and the cross-appeals dismissed, each party paying his own costs. The ease has, therefore, been referred to us for decision under the Letters Patent.

2. There are three appeals before us in which the defendants severally are appellants. In Appeal No. 9 of 1917 the 1st defendant is Appellant, in Appeal No. 8 of 1917 the 2nd and 3rd defendants are appellants and in Appeal No. 6 of 1917 the 4th defendant is appellant. In each of the appeals the plaintiff and the defendants other than the appellants are respondents, the 5