SHEO PRASAD Vs. LALA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application for revision arises out of a suit for contribution brought in the Court of Small Causes at Allahabad so far back as the year 1911. The case came up to this Court once before and after certain issues had been sent down to the Court below, it was finally remanded to that Court for re-trial in accordance with the judgment of Mr. Justice Tudball reported as Lola Ram v. Sheo Prasad 20 Ind. Cas. 176 : 11 A.L.J. 657. The facts are these:

(2.) The plaintiff and the two defendants jointly took a lease from the Oudh and Rohilkhand Railway Company for cutting grass. The rent reserved by the lease was Rs. 2,000. The Railway received on account of rent the total sum of Rs. 1,533-5-6; for the balance, namely Rs. 466-10-6, a suit was instituted on behalf of the Secretary of State against the three defendants and a decree was obtained on the 28th of May 1909. The amount of the decree was realised from the plaintiff 9 lone and thereupon he brought the suit, out of which this application for revision arises, for contribution against the two defendants. The suit was first dismissed, on the ground that it could not be maintained until after an account of tfce partnership had been taken. The defendants contended that they had paid off their share of liability for the rent and that nothing was due by them. After the remand by this Court the case was tried by the learned Judge of the Court of Sina Causes and he made a decree for the full amount of the claim agninft the two defendants.

(3.) This decree is clearly wrong in one respect. It was made jointly against both the defendants. In a suit for contribution it is the duty of the Court to determine the amount of liability of each defendant and to make a decree apportioning to each of them the amount for which he is found to be liable. A joint decree is clearly erroneous.