1. The Karnavan, who brought the suit in this Court died after decree and the lower Appellate Court finds that the Karnavan who succeeded him was not interested in filing an appeal as ho sided with the defendants in the suit. It has been held in Raja of Arakal v. Kunhi Kannan 31 Ind. Cas. 482 : 29 M.L.J. 632 that if the Karnavan for the time being is submitting to an infringement of the Tarwad's rights of property, the next senior member may take proceedings. The appellants in the lower Appellate Court are interested parties within the decision and the present Karnavan was joined as party respondent,
2. We are of opinion that the appeal was properly brought and we set aside the appellate decree and pass a decree restraining the respondents Nos. 1 to 5 from removing the timber logs and other materials found by the Subordinate Judge to be the property of the Tarwad (paragraph 11 of his judgment) from the possession or control of the 6th respondent or otherwise interfering with the rights of the Tarwad therein.
3. Respondents Nos. 1 to 5 will pay costs throughout.