JUDGMENT

1. This appeal arises out of a suit by the plaintiff Jadunandan Singh to set aside a mortgage and mortgage-decree obtained against his father Bal Narain Singh on the ground of fraud and want of legal necessity. The plaintiff's father executed a mortgage in favour of the ancestor of the answering defendants. The latter brought a suit" on the mortgage impleading both the plaintiff and his father. The plaintiff was at the time a minor. His father was at first named as his guardian ad litem but refused to act. The Nazir of the Court was then appointed guardian. Although notices had been served in connection with the (nomination of the plaintiff's father as his guardian, it appears that no second notice was served on the minor when the Nazir of the Court was appointed nor were any funds provided for the latter to defend the suit. Both the Courts have found that there was no fraud on the part of the defendants but the learned District Judge has held on the authority of Bhagwan Dayal v. Param Sukh 27 Ind. Cas. 623 : 37 A. 179 : 13 A.L.J. 179, that the plaintiff was not properly represented in that suit and on this ground has set aside the decree against him. We may note that the P