S. BARMAN, J.

( 1 ) THE defendants are the appellants before us. In May 1950, the plaintiffs filed a suit against the defendants alleging that they were trespas ers on the suit land. In september, 1951, there was a decree for ejectment of the defendants. Against the said decree, seven defendants appealed. During the pendency of the appeal one of the defendants being defendant No. 6 Chintamani Paital, died leaving him surviving his heirs and legal representatives. Admittedly, there was no substitution of the deceased's heirs and legal representatives.

( 2 ) THE only question for consideration on these facts, briefly stated above, is whether it was a case of partial or total abatement.

( 3 ) IT appears from the frame of the suit, as in the plaint, that it was a suit for declaration of the plaintiff's title. The prayers in paragraph 10 of the plaint are as follows:

" (a) that it be declared that the plaintiff No. 1 through the trustees plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 4 has title to the suit lands and that the defendants have no title or interest in it; (b) that the plaintiffs may be ordered to get delivery of possession of the suit lands through court; (c) that the plaintiffs may be ordered t