disclosed in the notice of action duly given. (e) A question will arise in construing the word voluntarily, where a prisoner is concerned. In Anantha Narayana v. Pariyana Kone, Mad. V. 101. The actual presence of the defendant within the jurisdiction is not necessary, if he was dwelling temporarily within jurisdiction at the commencement of the suit. In Mayhew, v. Tulloch, North-Western Provinces, 1872, p. 28. T. who was attached to a regiment stationed at S. attended a race meeting at M. and was served with a summons while there. The High Court laid down that, if T. had not availed himself of furlough, but was only present on short leave at M., he was not dwelling within the jurisdiction of the M. Court, or, if having availed himself of his furlough, he retained his permanent residence at S. and merely visited M. for a few days, he was in this case also not dwelling at M.; but if having availed himself of furlough, and having retained no permanent place of residence at S., nor having any permanent place and residence elsewhere, he attended the race meeting at M with the intention of leaving that place after the races, and of proceeding elsewhere, he must in accordance with the ruling in Morris v. Baumgarten (Bourke's Reports, p. 127) be held to have been dwelling at M. when the summons was served. (f) In case of a retail dealer purchasing goods by an Agent in Bombay place of retail sale was considered place of business Framji Kadasji Marker v. Hormaji Kawaji Marker Bom. H. C. I. 220. In Subharaya Madali, v. Cunliffe these words were held to imply personal and regular attendance to business, Mad, H. C. I., 286. In Chinnamul, v. Tulakannatammul similar to above, Scotland C. J. held that the words " carry on business" mean independent regular business in person, as in case Mitchell v. Hender (23. I. J. N. S. Q. B. 273.), or at an office or other fixed place of business (Rolfe v. Learmouth 14 B. 196), either personally, or by clerk or servants employed by defendant and conducting the business under his control, and in his individual or partnership name. Mad. H. C. III. 146. In Harjiban Das v. Bhagwan Das (0. L. R. VII, 102) an element of permanency in the business held to be required. In Ratansi Pancham v. C. Saunders, held that a firm simply employed by owner of a ship visiting Bombay to procure freight for her for a particular voyage cannot ordinarily be held to carry on business in the name of the owners of the ship, Bom. H. C. VIII. 159. (g) A. carries on business at town X. by a commission agent to whom he only consigns goods. A. is not held to personally work for gain at X. Gopee Mohan Roy, v. Protap Chander Roy, S. W. R. XI, 530. In Rai Narayan Das v. T. Newton, North-Western Provinces, 1874, p. 43. Semble. That a member of the Bar of the High Court residing out of the Station in which the High Court is located, but who holds himself out as ready to practise in the High Court, and who goes to the High Court, whenever he is engaged to appear there, is one, who personally works for gain inside of the limits of the station in which the High Court is located. (h) When? If the case Srimati Jagdamba Dasi v. Srimati Padamani Dasi, S. W. R. VI. 686, &c., et passim 111. 85, VI. 103. are any guide, the consent should have been obtained before hand; but * S. 2. 1870. Ch. II. 1, a.b.d. his intention to apply to such Court to transfer the suit to another Court, may apply accordingly; and the appellate Court, after hearing, the other parties, if they desire to be heard, shall determine in which of the Courts having jurisdiction the suit shall proceed. not so subordinate. 23. (12) Where such Courts are subordinate to different Procedure where they are appellate Courts, but are subordinate to the same High Court, any defendant, after giving notice in writing to the other parties of his intention to apply to the High Court to transfer the suit to another Court having jurisdiction may apply accordingly. If the suit is brought in any Court subordinate to a *District Court, the application, together with the objections, if any, filed by the other parties, shall be submitted through the District Court to which such Court is subordinate. The High Court may, after considering the objections, if any, of the other parties, determine in which of the courts having jurisdiction the suit shall proceed. (o) 24. (13) Where such Courts are subordinate to different High Courts any defendant may, Procedure where they are Courts. +Act VII. of subordinate to different High after giving notice in writingt to the other parties of his intention to apply to the High Court within whose jurisdiction the Court in which the suit is brought is situate, apply accordingly. If the suit is brought in any Court subordinate to at District Court, the application, together with the objections, if any, filed by the other parties, shall be submitted through the District Court to which such Court is subordinate, *S. 2. §S. 20, n. (k,) Ss. 16-19. TS. 6. n. (m.) **Ss. 3, q. v. Transfer of suits. and such High Court shall, after considering the objections, if any, of the other parties determine in which of the several Courts having jurisdiction the suit shall proceed. M. 25. (6) The High Court or District Court may, on theS application of any of the parties, after giving notice to the parties and hearing such of them as desire to be heard, or of its own motion, without giving such notice, withdraw any suit whether pending in a Court of first instance or in a Court of appeal súbordinate to such High Court or District Court, as the case may be, and try the suit itself, or transfer it for trial to any other such subordinate Court competent to try the same in respect of its naturell and the amount or value of its subject-matter.T For the purposes of this section the Courts of Additional and Assistant Judges shall be deemed to be subordinate to the District Court. The Court trying any suit withdrawn under this section from a Court of Small Causes shall, for the purposes of such suit, be deemed to be a Court of Small Causes.** the words in the Letters Patent, which governed these decisions, are clearer as to priority being necessary. (i) Neither Secs. 16 nor 17 apply to the High Court in original civil jurisdiction. (j) The Calcutta High Court direct (1869) that an alphabetical list be made by every District Judge and Judicial Commissioner . after reference to the records of the revenue survey, of the villages in bis district, showing the thana and munsifi jurisdiction in which each village is situated. The list should be prepared with an abstract statement on a distinct sheet exhibiting in three columns the names of munsifis, the sub-divisions with which they are conterminous, and the thanas comprised in each chowkey. The High Court desire at the same time that it be understood that the statements contained in such lists are not to be taken as conclusive and irrebuttable evidence as regards the jurisdiction within which the villages therein enumerated are situated. (C. O., 1869, No. 14, December 16th). (k) In Tetley v. Administrator General Bengal N.-W. P. 1870, p. 418. It was held that applications to a Court not required by the Code to be in writing do not fall within the 6th Section of the Court Fees Act, and require no stamp. If made in writing, however, they should bear a stamp. (1) An appeal lies from this order, Sec. 588. (m) The period, during which a case is going through this stage, is saved by the Limitation Act S. 15. (n) This para. does not apply to Mofussil Small Cause Courts. (0) The Calcutta High Court observe that they are very frequently called upon to pass orders upon applications made under sec. 23 by District Courts for leave to proceed with the trial of suits for property situate within the limits of different districts, and also upon applications, chiefly from Courts of Small Causes, for orders to be made under section 4, XXIII. 1861, (replaced by Section 21. Quære, These latter applications are no longer required save from parties themselves?) These applications, in a great number of instances, have not been accompanied by any sufficient statement of the facts of the case, and it seems to have been the common belief that such applications, and the orders of the High Court to be made upon them, are mere matters of form. But the Controlling power entrusted to the High Court by the sections above mentioned is meant to be really exercised, and it cannot be exercised without sufficient materials. The Court therefore find it necessary to direct that in all applications under Sec. 23, the facts shall be fully set forth, i, e., the names and residences of all the parties, and the nature and value of the different portions of the property in dispute, which are situated in various jurisdictions; and that, when any of the defendants reside beyond the local jurisdiction of the court in which the suit has been commenced, it shall appear that such defendants have had an opportunity of showing cause. This must not be taken as entitling defendants in cases referred under Sec. 23, to show cause by reason of the property in the suit being situated in different districts, when none of the defendants reside beyond the jurisdiction of the court in which the suit is instituted. U. C. O, C. H. C. P. p. 22. * S. 11 n. (c). †Ss. 31, 367. CHAPTER III. OF PARTIES AND THEIR APPEARANCES, APPLICATIONS Persons who may be joined as plaintiffs. M. 26. All persons may be (a) joined as plaintiffs in whom the right(b) to any relief claimed is alleged to exist whether jointly, severally, or in the alternative,(c) in respect of the same(d) causet of action. And judgment may be given for such one or more of the plaintiffs as may be found to be entitled to relief, for such relief as he or they may be entitled to without any amendment. But the defendant, though unsuccessful, shall be entitled to his costs occasioned Ss. 17, n. (d). by so joiningt any person who is not found entitled to relief, unless the Court in disposing of the costs of the suit otherwise directs. (e) § Ss. 75-77. Court may substitute or add plaintiff for or to plaintiff suing. M. 27. Where a suit has been instituted in the name of the wrong person as plaintiff, or where it is doubtful whether it has been instituted in the name of the right plaintiff, the Court may, if satisfied that the suit has been so commenced through a bonâ fide mistake, and that it is necessary for the determination of the real matter in dispute so to do, order any other person or persons to be substituted or added as plaintiff or plaintiffs upon such terms as the Court thinks just. M. 28. All persons may be joined as defendants against whom the right to any relief is Persons who may be alleged to exist, whether jointly, severally, or in the alternative, in respect of the same mattter. And judgment may be given against such one or more of the defendants as may be found to be liable, according to their respective liabilities, without any amendment. joined as defendants. Joinder of parties liable on same contract. M. 29. The plaintiff may, at his option, join as parties to the same suit all or any of the persons severally, or jointly and severally, liable on any one contract, (f) including parties, to bills of exchange, (g) hundis and promissory notes. (h) (i) interest. M. 30. Where there are numerous parties having the One party sue or defend same interest in one suit, one or on behalf of all in same more of such parties may, with the permission of the Court, sue or be sued, or may defend in such suit, on behalf of all parties so interested. But the Court shall in such case give, at the plaintiff's expense, notice of the institution of the suit of all such parties either by personal service§ or (if CHAPTER III. Persona conjuncta æquiparatur interesse proprio. Most of the Sections in this Chapter are taken with some modifications from the orders framed under the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1875. They deal with the joinder of parties, and are all permissive not obligatory; no suit will fail by reason of misjoinder Courts however under s. 53 (f) can reject, or return a plaint, when they consider parties have not been included, who should have been joined. Joinder of distinct causes of action is quite different from joinder of parties, and is dealt with in Chap. IV. One of a body of plaintiffs or defendants may with the Court's permission sue or defend on behalf of the rest. The Court has also a power given it to dismiss and add parties. Objections on the ground of non-joinder or misjoinder must always be taken before the first hearing. The closing sections provide for plaintiffs and defendants appearing by proxy in Court, and for revoking such proxy when it may seem expedient to them. The Calcutta High Court in their U. C. O. p. 1. write thus about misjoinder of parties. It should appear in the plaint that the persons, if more than one, who sue together as plaintiffs, all jointly, as a whole, and not some of them only, have the right, which it is the object of the suit to vindicate. If all the persons jointly entitled to the right which, according to the plaint, has been infringed, cannot be got to sue together, this fact should be stated in the plaint, together with the grounds of refusal, if known, and those who refuse to sue should be made parties defendant. But the plaint should distinguish the defendants against whom relief is sought from the others, and should specify the nature of the relief sought against each of the former, when it is not the same against all. Again, it should appear in the plaint that the cause of action of which the plaintiff complains is attributable in a greater or less degree to all the defendants against whom relief is asked, or to those whom they represent. If the cause for suing one defendant is essentially different from that for suing another, the plaint is bad for multifariousness, and should be returned to the plaintiff for amendment. (a) The rights and interests how- (c) As principal or agents, &c. &c. (e) Should a person whose inter ests are identical refuse to join Jagodambar Dasi v. Haran Chandar (f) An agreement enforceable by (f) In Kelly v. Hanlon B. L R. X., app. 23; the plaintiff sued, as endorsec of a promissory note, made by the defendant in favour of one |