Skip to content


Vasudeva Mallaya and ors. Vs. Thathadi Naranappaya and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in9Ind.Cas.787
AppellantVasudeva Mallaya and ors.
RespondentThathadi Naranappaya and ors.
Excerpt:
res judicata - finding on issue not material to decision of a case. - - 1. we think that the judge was clearly wrong in holding that the suit is barred by the rule of res judicata......the recovery of rs. 500 out of the purchase-money he owed to manjunatra bandri on account of the sale by manjunatra to the ist defendant. a question was raised as to whether the sale to the 1st defendant was a valid transaction, and this question formed the subject of the 4th issue in o.s. no. 223 of 1896. this might have been a material issue in that suit but the further question whether the mortgage by the 1st defendant to subraya was a genuine and valid transaction or a sham or fraudulent one was not material for the decision of badhabai's claim against the 1st defendant. this being the case, the finding on that question cannot bar the plaintiff's suit. we reverse the decision of the lower court and remand the suit for fresh disposal according to law. the costs will abide the result.
Judgment:

1. We think that the Judge was clearly wrong in holding that the suit is barred by the rule of res judicata. The previous suit O.S. No. 223 of 1896 was one by Radhabai, the 2nd defendant in this suit, against the 1st defendant for the recovery of Rs. 500 out of the purchase-money he owed to Manjunatra Bandri on account of the sale by Manjunatra to the Ist defendant. A question was raised as to whether the sale to the 1st defendant was a valid transaction, and this question formed the subject of the 4th issue in O.S. No. 223 of 1896. This might have been a material issue in that suit but the further question whether the mortgage by the 1st defendant to Subraya was a genuine and valid transaction or a sham or fraudulent one was not material for the decision of Badhabai's claim against the 1st defendant. This being the case, the finding on that question cannot bar the plaintiff's suit. We reverse the decision of the lower Court and remand the suit for fresh disposal according to law. The costs will abide the result.


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