SATYA NARAIN Vs. GANESH NARAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision application by the plaintiffs against an order of the appellate court refusing to hold an enquiry under O. 23, r. 3 C. P. C. to find out whether the suit had been compromised by the parties before the judgment of the trial court had been delivered.

(2.) IN dealing with this case I shall proceed on the assumption that a compromise had really been arrived at between the parties before the delivery of judgment in the trial court, without expressing any opinion on the point. 22nd March, 1965 was fixed for the delivery of judgment. The judgment was delivered in favour of the defendants and against the plaintiffs dismissing the suit. It is not alleged that any oral or written application was made before the trial court before the delivery of judgment asking it to stay pronouncement of judgment as talks of compromise were going on between the parties. Against the decree an appeal was preferred by the plaintiffs on 30-3-65. IN the grounds of appeal no mention was made that any compromise had taken place between the parties. The appeal was posted for hearing for 11-3-66. On 19-2-66 the plaintiffs made an application alleging that the suit was compromised under an oral agreement between the parties before the delivery of the judgment by the trial court and that the agreement was being drafted when the judgment was pronounced and praying that an enquiry may be made under O. 23 r. 3 into this allegation. The appellate court declined to hold such an enquiry on the ground that once the judgment was pronounced by the trial court no such enquiry could be made if the allegation was that the suit was compromised before the delivery of judgment.