Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

"But I do not see how Order 30 can affect the question of fact whether a suit brought in the name oE a firm in a case not within Order 30 is in. fact a case of misdescription of existing persons or 'a case of a suit brought by a nonexistent entity. That question, as I say, is one of fact, and in the present case it is proved on the evidence that the firm in .whose name the suit was originally brought does not describe certain existing persons."

We regard this as the correct view to take of the provision in Order 1, R, 10 read with Order 30, Civil P. C. There are a few later decisions but it is unnecessary to refer to them as We are in entire agreement with the view of Beaumont C. J. We share with Beaumont C. J. his difficulty in understanding what connection the terms of Order 30, Civil P. O. have on the question as to whether the description of the plaintiff originally is or is not a misnomer which is wholly a question of fact.