SAMPALLI HANUMANT RAO Vs. SAMPALLI AMRUTAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order of the District Judge, Warangal, dared 3/08/1961 made in Appeal Suit No. 32 of 1900, whereby the judgment and decree of the Principal Munsiff, Warangal made in O. S. No. 87 of 1958 dated 12/08/1960, has been confirmed.

(2.) The petitioner herein instituted a suit, O. S. No. 87 of 1958 on the file of the Principal Munsiff, Warangal, for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 871-7-0 alleging that the husband of the respondent had entered into a sale agreement with him in respect of it certain piece of land, but instead of delivering possession of the same he had filed a suit for declaration of permanent injunction against him in O. S. No. 50/1 of 1956 and thereby prevented him from taking possession of the suit land. He was, therefore entitled to recover the amount advanced by him to the husband of the respondent Inwards the sale price. The defendant-respondent contested the suit and inter alia pleaded the suit was barred by the principle of res judicata as in the, earlier suit O. S. No. 50/1 of 1956, the matter had been heard and finally decided. The Principal Munsif Magistrate. Warangal on a consideration of the arguments advanced gave a finding in favour of the respondent holding that the suit was barred by the principle of res judicata. On appeal, the District Judge, Warangal upheld the said finding. The revision is directed against this order.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that though there was a specific issue in O. S. No. 50/1 of 1956 in regard to the sale agreement that question did not require a decision for the disposal of the said suit. The finding had been merely given to save a remand and, therefore, the principle of res judicata was not attracted.