1. The suit that has led to this appeal by the additional first plaintiff, was instituted by the original plaintiff as the manager of a private school, to compel the defendant-respondent to render accounts and to realise a sura of over Rs. 3000, alleged to have been misappropriated by him when he was managing the school of which he was the receiver appointed by a Magistrate under S.128 of the Travancore Criminal Procedure Code of 1067. In or about the year 1114, disputes arose between the proprietors of the school, as to its possession, which led to the proceedings before the Magistrate; afterwards, they settled their differences and the proceedings were dropped. The original plaintiff was then elected as the manager of the school. It appears that before the suit was filed, the Magistrate had passed the accounts of the receiver and had ordered his discharge. At the trial, the respondent took the objection, that the suit would not lie against him without the leave of the Court which appointed him receiver and after the accounts had been passed. The subordinate judge who tried the suit, dismissed it on this objection, without addressing himself to the merits of the case.