The order of the lower Court impleading the husband of the second defendant as a party to the partition suit cannot be supported. The claim of the third party is that he was entitled to the suit property in his own right Admittedly, he is not one of the sharers to the estate of Madaras a Sahib. It is well settled that, in substance, a partition suit between Mohamadan co-sharers is in the nature of an administration suit. The question of the title of the third parties to the estates will not always be a proper one for adjudication in a suit for administration. Mr. K. Hariharan contends that the plea that the respondent was entitled to the property had already been taken by defendants 1 and 2 in the case, and that, if he is impleaded as a party, multiplicity of suits will be avoided. These are not the only considerations that should guide a Court in impleading a party to the suit. The power to implead a party to a suit is governed by Order 1, rule 10, Civil Procedure Code. A party can be impleaded only when he is a necessary or a proper party. It cannot be stated that a person claiming an adverse title to the estate of the deceased would be either a necessary or a proper pa