AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The plaintiff sued for a declaration of right in respect of a tank and an injunction against the defendants. Both the Courts below have dismissed the suit on the ground that there is no averment in the plaint of ownership. We think this is a narrow construction. The plaintiff states that he and certain others have been in enjoyment, that they have made repairs, and that they have taken the fish. He also made a statement on the 20th August 1907 that he and his cousins had the ''huq'' and none else. All that can be said at the highest is that the plaint is somewhat ambiguous. An amendment might have been asked for to make the plaintiff''s meaning clear; the suit should not have been dismissed. As regards the other persons mentioned, who have not been joined, their absence is not fatal to the suit. It may be more convenient to make them parties.
We set aside the decrees of Courts below and remand the suit to the Munsif for disposal according to law. The costs hitherto incurred will be provided for in the revised decree.