https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279899 A representative suit brought through the Collector on behalf of life tenants could not be terminated by withdrawal where reversioners were materially interested in the estate. The widows, suing under the Court of Wards framework, were treated as representing the entire estate, including future reversionary interests, so the court could add the reversioner as plaintiff to ensure the controversy was decided on merits. The reversioner was therefore entitled to continue the litigation, and the refusal to permit substitution was erroneous. en-us Tue, 02 May 1933 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Apr 2019 14:45:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279899 A representative suit brought through the Collector on behalf of life tenants could not be terminated by withdrawal where reversioners were materially interested in the estate. The widows, suing under the Court of Wards framework, were treated as representing the entire estate, including future reversionary interests, so the court could add the reversioner as plaintiff to ensure the controversy was decided on merits. The reversioner was therefore entitled to continue the litigation, and the refusal to permit substitution was erroneous. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 02 May 1933 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279899