Madhavan Nair, J.

1. This is an application under Section 115 of the Civil P.C. to revise an order of the Subordinate Judge which directed the plaintiffs to amend the plaint. The suit instituted by these plaintiffs was for the establishment of occupancy rights in their various holdings which they claimed against the Shrotriamdar. The Subordinate Judge holding that the cause of action of each plaintiff was distinct and also that there were special causes of action in which all the plaintiffs were not interested thought it would be more convenient if the plaintiffs were called upon to amend the plaint and therefore made an order to that effect. That order has also been acted upon to a certain extent by the 9th plaintiff. The vakil appearing for all the plaintiffs put in an application stating that in obedience to the order of the Court he was prepared to confine the plaint to the 9th plaintiff alone, and, accordingly the plaint was amended.

2. It is now argued that the order of the lower Court is unsustainable because, really speaking, there is only one cause of action alleged in the plaint. But, on reading the pleadings, it is clear that two be three separate questions arise f