Venkatasubba Rao, J.

1. An objection which ought to have been taken in limine has been raised at the closing stage of a long argument to the effect that the appeal is incompetent on account of certain parties not having been added as respondents. We do not at present propose to sot out the history of this long-drawn litigation, for it is sufficient to state just a few facts in order to deal with the contention raised. This was a partition suit commenced nearly two decades ago and the members of the family to which the action relates owned considerable properties when it started, but they have since been reduced, with the exception of defendant 6, to such straits that some are represented by the assignees in insolvency and the others by the trustees under a composition deed. The only solvent member now of the family is defendant 6 and he is the appellant before us. There are several memoranda of objections in the nature of cross-appeals which have been filed. The principal contesting respondent is defendant 3 represented by the receiver in insolvency and the preliminary objection referred to above has been raised by his counsel, Mr. Venkatarama Sastri. In the action originall