Skip to content


Naiwale Sulaiman Ali Khan and ors. Vs. Munra Venkatanarayana Garu and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1926Mad146
AppellantNaiwale Sulaiman Ali Khan and ors.
RespondentMunra Venkatanarayana Garu and ors.
Excerpt:
- .....o.s. no. 358 of 1904 on the file of the court of the principal district munsif of masulipatam. a joint decree was passed against the two defendants by the court of first instance. on appeal the subordinate judge departed from the usual rule of passing general decrees against the two defendants because he was under the impression that there was only one judgment-debtor in the said o.s. no. 358 of 1904 and the others were all his legal representatives. the report submitted by the subordinate judge shows that in this assumption he was wrong. it follows therefore that the joint decree against the two defendants should not have been passed by the lower court. so far as the 1st defendant is concerned the lower court's decree is modified and the plaintiff will get a decree for half the amount.....
Judgment:

Madhavan Nair, J.

1. The 1st defendant is the appellant. He is now dead and his legal representatives have been brought on record. Plaintiff's suit was one for contribution against two persons who were, along with others, judgment-debtors in O.S. No. 358 of 1904 on the file of the Court of the Principal District Munsif of Masulipatam. A joint decree was passed against the two defendants by the Court of first instance. On appeal the Subordinate Judge departed from the usual rule of passing general decrees against the two defendants because he was under the impression that there was only one judgment-debtor in the said O.S. No. 358 of 1904 and the others were all his legal representatives. The report submitted by the Subordinate Judge shows that in this assumption he was wrong. It follows therefore that the joint decree against the two defendants should not have been passed by the lower Court. So far as the 1st defendant is concerned the lower Court's decree is modified and the plaintiff will get a decree for half the amount against the assets of the 1st dafenant in the hands of his legal representatives. In other respects, the decree of the lower Court will stand. The parties will pay and receive proportionate costs. The 1st respondent's Vakil's fee in this case is fixed at Rs. 35.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //