MISHRI MAT Vs. SOHAN RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a second appeal by the plaintiffs against a decree of the lower appellate court dismissing their suit for a permanent injunction which had been decreed by the trial court. The relief claimed was that the defendants be restrained from raising any construction over land coloured in green colour and marked as No. 4 in a plan attached to an agreement, dated 30th June, 1952 entered into between the parties. The suit was based on the agreement. The defence of the defendants inter alia was that the agreement was unenforceable as' part of the consideration for it was to stifle the prosecution of a case under secs. 147, 447 and 379, I. P. C. which was pending between the parties when it was entered into. The trial court did not frame any issue on this point. Nor does the point appear to have been raised before it at the time of arguments as there is no mention of it in its judgment. But the point was raised on behalf of the defendants before the lower appellate court and it was held that the agreement was void under sec. 23 of Contract Act as part of its consideration was to stifle the prosecution for non-compoundable offences.

(2.) THE first contention on behalf of the appellants is that there is not sufficient evidence on record from which it could be inferred that there was a criminal case involving non-compoundable offences between the parties when the agreement took place and. that part of the consideration for it was the stifling of the prosecution.