Umabai Mangeshrao vs Vithal Vasudeo Shetti on 19 November, 1908
871 which was cited with approval in Umabai v. Vithal. (1908) 33 Bom. 293 But these decisions do not, in my opinion, conflict with the view which I have expressed. They go no further, as I understand them, than deciding; that it is open or competent or lawful for a plaintiff suing in ejectment to join as co-defendants various alienees who are in possession of portions or fragments of the property in suit. They do not, I think, decide, what alone would assist the respondents here, that it is obligatory upon such a plaintiff to join all such alienees as co-defendants at the risk of forfeiting his right to recover from those whom he fails to join in his first suit: in other words, they do not decide that the cause of action supplied by one alienation is identical with the cause of action supplied by another.