Respondent may challenge adverse findings without cross-objections when only resisting enlargement of the decree

Order XLI Rule 22 permits a respondent to support a decree on any ground decided against him in the court below without filing cross-objections, so long as the challenge is confined to sustaining the decree in his favour. A respondent may therefore rely on an adverse finding to resist enlargement of the decree in favour of the appellant, especially where the decree is partly favourable to both sides. The rule does not require cross-objections when the respondent merely seeks to preserve the extent of the decree already granted. The question was answered in the affirmative.

---

---

Issues: Whether a defendant-respondent, without filing cross-objections, may in resisting the plaintiff's appeal challenge an adverse finding which, if accepted, would have required total dismissal of the suit.

Analysis: Order XLI, Rule 22 permits a respondent to support the decree on any ground decided against him in the court below, though he has not appealed from that part of the decree. The right is confined to sustaining the decree in so far as it is in his favour and does not require a cross-objection when the respondent seeks only to resist an increase in the decree by showing that the plaintiff was not entitled to more. In a decree that is partly in favour of each side, the respondent may rely on a ground rejected below to preserve the extent of the decree already in his favour.

Conclusion: The respondent was entitled to urge the contention without filing cross-objections, and the question referred was answered in the affirmative.

---