1. The learned Judge of the Court of Small Causes at Jhansi has referred to us the question whether a finding recorded in a certain previous litigation does or does not operate as res judicata between the parties to a suit now pending before him. In the former litigation the parties were arrayed on the same side as defendants, but there was a question in issue between them and the adjudication of the same was necessary to give appropriate relief to the then plaintiff. The point was duly decided, and was decided in a sense favourable to the plaintiff in this subsequent suit in connection with which the reference is now made. On the principles laid down by this Court in Ahmad Ali v. Najabat Khan 18 A. 65 : A.W.N. (1865) 156 and in Chajju v Umrao Singh 22 A. 386 : A.W.N. (1900) 120 the decision arrived at in the former suit does operate as res judicata in the present one. This is our answer to this reference. We are of opinion that the plaintiff in the case, who alone has been represented before this Court, is entitled in any event to his costs of this hearing, as the reference by the Court below was made at the express instance of the defendant.