HARCHAND PANAJI Vs. GULABCHAND KANJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The lower Courts have declined to execute a decree of a Baroda Court against the respondent s father Kanji Kapura which had been transferred for execution against his estate to the Court of the Second Class Subordinate Judge of Surat.

(2.) The learned Judge of the lower appellate Court states that it was conceded that on the principles of International law as laid down in Gurdyal Singh v. Raja of Faridkot (1894) I. L, R. 22 Cal. 222. the decree would have been a nullity had the defendant not appeared and defended the suit in the Baroda Court, and that it was argued before him that the defendant had voluntarily submitted to the jurisdiction by employing a pleader to defend the suits. As to this the learned Judge of the lower appellate Court says that the defendant protested against the right of the Baroda Court to entertain the suit at the earliest opportunity and did not make any other defence.

(3.) We have referred to the statement of the pleadings and issues in the Baroda Court and find that the statement of the lower appellate Court is incorrect.