Skip to content


Rup Jaun Bibee Vs. Abdul Kadir Bhuyan and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1904)ILR31Cal643
AppellantRup Jaun Bibee
RespondentAbdul Kadir Bhuyan and ors.
Cases ReferredH.W. Hudson v. Basdeo Bajpye
Excerpt:
contribution, suit for - appeal--decree--defendants--appellate court, power of, to make another defendant liable there to appeal by plaintiff. - .....only, can alter the decree so as to render liable another defendant, against whom the plaintiff has preferred no appeal.3. the consequence is that the appeal must be dismissed with two separate sets of costs payable to the two separate sets of respondents, including the costs of the reference.
Judgment:

Francis W. Maclean, C.J.

1. We are of opinion that, in a suit for contribution, such as the present the case of Upendra Lal Mukerjee v. Girindra Nath Mukerjee (1898) I.L.R. 25 Clac. 565 was rightly decided. We may add that that case was subsequently followed by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of H.W. Hudson v. Basdeo Bajpye (1898) I.L.R. 26 Calc. 109 to which decision, I notice, one of the present referring Judges was a party. It appears from the judgments both of the Munsiff and of the Subordinate Judge that the real contest was not between the plaintiff and the defendants, but between defendant No. 1 and defendant No. 2.

2. As regards the second question it is too general for an answer We confine ourselves to saying that, in a suit such as is the present, an Appellate Court, when a decree has been given against one defendant only, can alter the decree so as to render liable another defendant, against whom the plaintiff has preferred no appeal.

3. The consequence is that the appeal must be dismissed with two separate sets of costs payable to the two separate sets of respondents, including the costs of the reference.


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