Bapna, J.—This is an appeal against the judgment of the learned District Judge, Baran, dated 14.12.49, by the plaintiff in a suit for recovery of money.

2. The suit was originally instituted by Hazarilal describing himself as the son of Hiralal, proprietor of the firm of Seth Hiralal Hazarilal. The defendant Jagannath was described as son of Lalliram, owner of Lalliram Jagannath at Tekneri Pachar, Madhya Pradesh. The suit was for recovery of Rs. 3,703/-/3. It was instituted on 23rd October, 1948, in the court of Civil Judge, Baran, and the cause of action for purposes of limitation was stated to have arisen on the 15th of November, 1945 The defendant took a preliminary objection that the plaintiff was not the sole owner of the firm Hiralal Hazarilal, but one Sunderlal was also a partner, and that as the suit was not in the name of the firm the suit was bad for non-joinder. The plaintiff filed an application on 16th February, 1949, praying for amendment of the plaint so as to make the firm Hiralal Harazilal as the plaintiff. In this application it was mentioned that Sunderlal was not made a party, because he had not contributed towards the capital of the firm. It seems to have been i

Click Here to Read the rest of this document