GOVIND BABA GUJAR Vs. SHRIMANT JIJIBAI SAHEB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff sues the defendant as pledge of certain ornaments from an unauthorised pledgor for detention of those ornaments after demand made on or about the nth of August 1907. That claim was preferred after the plaintiff had recovered judgment in a former action, No. 159 of 1897^ against the pledgor but the judgment so recovered has not been satisfied.

(2.) It has been pleaded that the judgment in the suit of 1897 s a bar to this suit on the ground that the pledgor and the pledgee were joint: tort-feasors and that upon the authority of Brinsmead v. Harrison,(1872) L.R. 7 C.P. 547 the matter has passed into rest judicata and cannot be again agitated.

(3.) It has, however, been pointed out by Mr. Justice Willes in the judgment of the lower Court in Brinsmead v. Harrison,(1871) L.R. 6 C.P. 584, that a fresh assignment in respect of a tort subsequent to that originally sued upon will not come within the scope of the first judgment so as to bar the fresh assignment. We may also refer to the case of Wegg Prosser v. Evansi,[1895] 1 Q.B. 108, which shows that the cause of action in the second suit must be precisely the same as the cause of action in the first suit in order to make the judgment in the first suit a bar to proceedings in the second suit.