JUDGMENT

1. This is an application in revision from an order of a Small Cause Court Judge. It appears that the plaintiff before the Small Cause Court obtained a decree for Rs. 533-13-0 ex parte against the defendant on 12th November 1927. On 12th April 1928, the defendant obtained knowledge of the decree. On 22nd April 1928, he applied to set aside the decree, and in recordance with the rules filed a security bond with two sureties. On 27th April 1928, Balgovind applied to withdraw his name as surety. On 30th April 1928, the defendant paid into Court a sum of Rs. 335 which be thought was a sufficient sum to represent the suretyship of Balgovind. On 21st July 1928, the decree-holder objected to the security bond on the ground that the other surety Gopi Tewari being a Hindu and having two sons, his suretyship was worth nothing. It is to be observed that the security given was a hypothecation bond by Gopi Tewari in respect of joint and ancestral property. The Small Cause Court Judge decided this matter very briefly, and he says:

The decree-holder says that his security is not enough, that Gopinath has sons, and as other security has not been filed, the application is dismissed.

2. It is