JUDGMENT 1. The plaintiff obtained a decree for redemption against the defendants Nos. 1 to 4. The defendants Nos. 1 an 3 appealed against the decree and the decree of the first Court was reversed and the suit dismissed. The decree for redemption directing payment of the mortgage amount to defendants Nos. 2 and 4 jointly with defendants Nos. 1 and 3 should not have been reversed in their absence. They were (sic) parties to the appeal and the Subordinate Judge should have either dismissed the appeal or made them parties. As the defendants Nos. 2 and 4 were ex parte in the first Court and are the sons of the 1st defendant, who had appealed and sufficiently represented their interests, we think it is, a fit case to make them parties. We accordingly reverse the decree of the lower appellate Court, direct the District Court to make the defendants Nos. 2 and 4 parties to the appeal and proceed to dispose of it according to law. Costs will abide the result.