AMAR CHAND Vs. BHANO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Though the respondents have been served, they are not appearing either in person or through counsel. We have heard the counsel for the appellant. Admittedly, the appellant had undertaken as a surety, on behalf of the defendant Dia Singh, for the due performance of the decree for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- including mesne profits payable by Dia Singh to the decree-holder. By the subsequent conduct, the decree-holder compromised with the principal judgment-debtor and a compromise was recorded in that behalf without reference to the surety.

(3.) The question, therefore, is whether the amount undertaken by the appellant towards mesne profits as surety could be recovered from him. Section 145 of C.P.C. provides thus: