( 1 ) THIS revision application is by the State of Gujarat. A few facts may be stated for understanding the controversy. Plaintiffs claim was that defendants Nos. 1 and 2 are liable to rent etc. in respect of a shop. According to the plaint defendant No. 3 was in actual possession of the said shop as a tenant of defendants Nos. 1 and 2. The plaintiffs therefore claimed to eject defendant No. 3 and prayed for possession of the shop. Defendant No. 3 died on 30-10-58 but this fact was not noticed by either the trial Court or the Counsel and a decree was passed on 7-1-59. An appeal was filed against the decree and in the course of the appeal application Ex. 14 was filed on 31-3-60 for bringing the heirs of deceased defendant No. 3 on record. Another application Ex. 23 was given by defendants Nos. 1 and 2 to the effect that the suit had abated and that the Court should declare that the suit had abated. The appellate Court passed one order on both Exs. 14 and 23 on 26-7-60. The Court held that the whole suit cannot abate in the circumstances. It also allowed the legal representatives of the deceased defendant No. 3 to be added as respondents. It is against this order that t