1895 (12) TMI 1

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Nos. 2 and 4, and have dispossessed him by having brought the holdings to sale in execution of the decrees obtained by them and having themselves become the purchasers. 2. The defendants raised several objections in their defence, of which it is necessary for the purposes of this appeal to notice only one, namely, the plea of res judicata, as that is the only ground upon which the lower Court has dismissed the suit of the plaintiff. 3. The plea is based upon a judgment passed in favour of the defendants Nos. 6 to 8 in a former suit for rent brought by them against the defendants Nos. 1, 2 and 4, in which the present plaintiff intervened as a defendant. The question raised in that suit which was brought in the Munsif's Court (it being ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....being the facts of the case, the Court below has held that the decision of the District Judge in the former suit operated as res judicata upon the question of title raised in the present case. 7. In appeal it is contended by the learned Vakil for the appellant that this decision is wrong, firstly, because the former suit, in which a decision adverse to the plaintiff was passed, was brought in the Munsif's Court which was not a Court of jurisdiction competent to try the present suit which is valued at a sum exceeding ₹ 1,000, and to which value no exception is taken by the other side; and, secondly, because the question of title, which is a matter directly and substantially in issue in the present case, was not directly and substa....