Joint family business suits: misdescription of managerial capacity and non-joinder of coparceners do not defeat maintainability.

A suit for redemption of pledged ornaments by the accredited managers of a joint family business was held maintainable despite the plaintiffs not describing themselves in the plaint as such managers and despite non-joinder of other coparceners. The omission was treated as a curable mis-description, because a manager of a joint family business may sue in his own name on behalf of the family business. The objection to non-joinder was therefore not substantial, and the view that the suit should be dismissed on that ground was incorrect.

---

---

Issues: Whether the suit for redemption of pledged ornaments was not maintainable for non-joinder of other coparceners when the plaintiffs were managers of the joint family business.

Analysis: The evidence showed that the plaintiffs were the managers of the joint family business. A manager of such business could sue in his own name on behalf of the family business. The failure to describe themselves in the plaint as managers of the joint family business was only a mis-description and did not affect the maintainability of the suit. The objection that all coparceners had to be joined as plaintiffs was therefore not of a substantial character.

Conclusion: The suit was maintainable and the finding that it ought to have been dismissed for non-joinder was incorrect.

Final Conclusion: The order of the learned Single Judge was set aside and the second appeal was directed to be heard on the merits by a Single Judge.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the plaintiffs are the accredited managers of a joint family business, a suit instituted by them in their own names is not defeated by omission to describe them as managers or by non-joinder of other coparceners, since such omission is a curable mis-description and not a fatal defect in maintainability.

---