Dwarka Dass Nayar vs Dwarka Dass Sehgal on 7 January, 1972
(17) They then observed that it was open to the beneficial owner to apply to be joined in the action; but whether he is made a party or not, a proceeding by or against his representative in its ultimate result ih fully binding on him. This principle has been accepted and followed in subsequent decisions and some of these decisions are reported in I.L.R. 15 Lahore 732 in re: Puran Das v. Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee and another) I.L.R. 44 Btmibay 352 in re : Ramchandra Vithal Bhat v. Gajanannarayan DeshMukh and another(1o) I.L.R. 42 Madras 348 in re : Vaitheswara Aiyer v. Srinivasa Raghava Iyengar and others (II) 52 Hidian Cases 324 in re : Goivan Dhangar v. Sheikh Gondar(12) 62 Indian Cases 799 in re: Bhana Mal v. Beli Ram (13) 70 Indian Cases 849 in re : Shafiud-Din and another v. Musammat Hurmat and others;(14) 35 Calcutta L.J. 43 in re : Panchu Gopal Chattopadhya and another v. Srimali Matang M Debi(15) and 33 Calcutta L.J. 369 in re : Krishnajiban Sanval v. Mahammad Masiuddin Mandal and others').