SUDARSAN PODDAR Vs. MANINDRA CHANDRA PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts giving rise to this appeal are of a somewhat complicated nature and it is therefore necessary to set them out briefly for the purpose of understanding what is said here- after. It appears that there was a partition suit between certain cosharers, one of whom was named Mathuranath Poddar. That was Suit No. 6 of 1913. In that suit, the preliminary decree for partition was made on 15 September 1914. The preliminary decree is not before us but the learned advocates on both sides are agreed that it was in the ordinary form, that is, it declared the shares of the parties and gave direction for partition by metes and bounds. The final decree in the partition suit was made on 18 December 1917. It appears that, under the terms of the final decree, the said cosharer Mathuranath was held to be entitled to certain immovable properties and was further held to be entitled to a sum of money, namely, Rs. 10,573 odd annas. Although the final decree was made so far back as 18 December 1917, it appears that the final decree was not drawn up till 9 December 1918.

(2.) Meanwhile, one Sudarsan Poddar, who is defendant 1 in the suit, out of which this appeal has arisen, and who is the appellant before us, instituted a suit being Suit No. 70 of 1916 in the Court of the Fourth Subordinate Judge of Dacca, against Mathuranath and others. But this suit was transferred to the Fifth Subordinate Judge and was numbered 99 of 1917. It appears that Sudarsan Poddar attached the right, title and interest of Mathuranath in the said properties before judgment on 10 May 1916. He subsequently obtained a decree against Mathuranath and others.

(3.) The plaintiffs in the present suit, Shanandachandra Pal and others, instituted a suit, being Suit No. 459 of 1917 in the First Subordinate Judge's Court at Dacca, for recovery of certain moneys against Mathuranath and others. The suit was decreed on 15 April 1918.