J C GALSTAUN Vs. RADHAKISSEN CHAMARIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff, in this case, claims to recover Rs. 33,100, with interest at 8 per cent, per annum, from the 13 October, 1922, and also an additional sum of Rs. 1,250, in circumstances, which, as the facts are not disputed, may be stated very briefly.

(2.) In 1918, the plaintiff sold certain property in Bentinck Street to the defendant. It was also agreed that he should take a lease of the property for 10 years. The sale was duly completed, but, shortly afterwards, the property was acquired by the Calcutta Improvement Trust. The parties jointly filed a claim, and compensation amounting to Rs. 3,39,250 was awarded. The question arose whether the plaintiff, Galstaun, was entitled to any, and, if so, to what portion of that sum. This question was referred to the arbitration of two gentlemen and, pending their award, the defendant Radhakissen Chamaria, by arrangement, withdrew the whole compensation money, undertaking to pay to the plaintiff, Galstaun, any sum which might be awarded to him upon such reference. Ultimately the arbitrators made their award in favour of the plaintiff, Galstaun, as to Rs. 31,350 which included the coats of the reference. The plaintiff now seeks to recover the amount stated. There is no defence on the merits. The question is, whether, in certain other circumstances which have also arisen, the plaintiff is entitled to obtain a decree for this amount.

(3.) In the list for the day, immediately before this case, there was before me a suit between the same parties, wherein Radhakissen Chamaria sued Galstaun for the recovery of the monies due on a mortgage of other property, and, by the consent, the usual mortgage decree for sale was made. It appears that, in all probability, it will be found that a sum very much larger than Rs. 33,350 will be found due to the Chamaria defendant from the plaintiff Galstaun, and it is submitted, that in the circumstances, they are entitled in this suit to claim a set-off.