GHASIRAM GOENKA Vs. HARIBUX GOBERDHONEDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application by Haribux Goberdhonedas that a consent decree made by my learned brother Buckland J., on, 14 August last be set aside.

(2.) The suit was one for Rs. 3052-9-2,-being the price of goods sold and delivered, the applicants being impleaded as guarantors. The applicants entered1 appearance and filed a written statement by which they put the factum of the guarantee in issue. The suit came on for hearing on 11 August last. Mr. B.C. Ghose was briefed as counsel for the defendants to ask for an adjournment. He applied for the adjournment which was refused and he was thereupon instructed to continue to represent the defendants in the ease itself, the brief having previously been delivered to him. The applicant's account of the only important incident with which I am concerned is to be found in para. 10 of their petition which runs as follows: A short time after the case was opened by Mr. A.K. Roy who appeared for the plaintiff Mr. Boy read to his Lordship the Honble Mr. Justice Buckland the translation of a portion of the said letter and on Mr. Ghose asking Mr. Roy to show it to him the same was handed to Mr. Ghose. Mr. Ghose perused same, suddenly turned round and asked your petitioner's attorney to tell your pertitioner's to consent to a decree and just as your petitioner's attorney Mr. J.K. Mukherji was going to ask Goberdhonedas Deora who was present in Court if your petitioners were agreeable to consent to a decree, Mr. Ghose suddenly stood up and told the Court that your petitioners consented to a decree for the amount claimed in the plaint without the consent or authority of your petitioners.

(3.) Thereafter a decree was passed to which the applicants now take exception saying that counsel had no authority to consent and in fact consented against their wishes.