Bhandari, J.

1. This appeal raises the question whether a person who is merely a formal party to an action and against whom no relief is claimed is bound by or entitled to the benefits of the rules of res judicata?

2. The facts of the case are simple and not in dispute. On 22-8-1945 one Geeta Ram brought a suit against S. Arjan Singh defendant 1 for a mandatory injunction restraining him from putting up any structure on a courtyard belonging jointly to the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 7 and requiring him to demolish any structure which had already been constructed. Defendants 1 to 7 were impleaded as defendants but relief was claimed only against defendant 1 and none against defendants 2 to 7. Defendants 2 to 7 failed to appear in Court and ex parte proceedings were taken against them. On 18-6-1947 the trial Court passed a decree in favour of the plaintiff, the relevant portion of which is in the following terms:-

-

"It is hereby ordered that an ex parte decree for permanent injunction in accordance with the prayer in the plaint be passed in favour of the plaintiff against defendant 1. Defendants 2 to T are pro forma ".

When the plaintiff proceeded to execute the decree fo