Present : Bertram C.J. and De Sampayo J.  1920

SUPPIAH v. CROOS.

8-D. C. (Inty.) Colombo, 13,569.

Mortgage action-Discovery of the existence of a puisne incumbrancer after decree-Application to join puisne incumbrancer as party after decree-Civil Procedure Code, ss. 18 643.

The plaintiff in a mortgage action discovered, subsequently to the decree, the existence of a puisne encumbrancer, and then applied to Court to be allowed to join the puisne incumbrancer as a party.

Held, that he was not entitled to add him as a party at that stage of the action.

THE facts appear from the judgment.

A. St. V. Jayawardene, for plaintiff, appellant.-The plaintiff did not register his address, and, therefore, the decree obtained by him is not binding on the puisne incumbrancer. The plaintiff now applies to add him as a party in order to render the mortgage decree effectual. The application is made under section 18 of the Civil Procedure Code. Under this section the Court may " at any time " order a party to be joined, in order to enable the Court effectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the action. The decre