Gopi Nath Chattopadhya and Another vs Sajani Kanta Singh

Maclean, C.J.—We think this case is governed in principle by the decision in the Full Bench case of Ishan Chander Sirkar v. Beni Madhab Sarcar I. L. R. 24 Cal. 62 (1896), having regard to the effect and nature of a decree in a rent suit. That was pointed out in a very recent decision in Azgar Ali v. Asaboddin Kazi 9 C. W. N. 134 (1904) which shows that even if the purchase had taken place before the decree, inasmuch as the interest of the purchaser is bound by the decree in the rent suit, the purchaser is in the same position as the purchaser was in the Full Bench case and, therefore, on the principle of the latter case is a representative within the meaning of sec. 244. It is desirable, if it can legally be done, that questions of this class should be decided under sec. 244 instead of putting the parties to the expense of another suit. The case must, therefore, go back with this intimation of our opinion to be tried out on the merits which have not been dealt with by the District Judge. The costs will abide the result. We assess the costs at 2 gold mohurs. The Application No. 2378 of 1904 is not pressed.