1951 (7) TMI 19 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether acknowledgment of a previous debt not barred by limitation could be the basis of a suit?
2. Whether the judgments of the former Chief Court of Jodhpur are binding on the High Court of Rajasthan?

Analysis:
1. The appellant filed a suit against the respondent for recovery of a sum based on a 'Khata' document. The respondent argued that the document was a mere acknowledgment and could not form the basis of the suit. The trial Court and the appellate Court ruled in favor of the respondent. A Single Judge of the High Court referred the question of whether acknowledgment of a previous debt not barred by limitation could be the basis of a suit to a Division Bench. The Division Bench referred to a previous case law and concluded that an acknowledgment of liability only extends the limitation period and does not create a new right or basis for a suit.

2. The appellant argued that a Full Bench decision of the former Chief Court of Jodhpur held that an acknowledgment of liability signed by a debtor could form a good basis for a suit. The case was referred to a Full Bench due to its importance. The judgment discussed the jurisdiction of the former Chief Court of Jodhpur and the High Court of Rajasthan. It was established that the former Chief Court of Jodhpur was not a Court of co-ordinate jurisdiction with the High Court of Rajasthan. The judgment clarified that the Full Bench decision of the Chief Court of Jodhpur does not hold binding authority on the High Court of Rajasthan.

3. The judgment also analyzed the laws in force in the previous Covenanting States and the interpretation of the term 'law' in the context of Judge-made law. It was concluded that the law referred to in the relevant ordinances did not include Judge-made law. The judgment reaffirmed the decision in a previous case that a mere acknowledgment of debt does not create a new contract and must be based on the original cause of action. The plaintiff was allowed to amend the plaint to incorporate the original cause of action, with costs to be paid to the respondent. The appeal was accepted, and the case was remanded to the trial Court for further proceedings.