High CourtsDivision Bench(1913) 05 CAL CK 0034

Nabin Chandra Hazari vs Mirtunjoy Barick

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 22 May 1913 · Citation: AIR 1914 Cal 162 : (1914) ILR (Cal) 50

HON’BLE JUDGES
Stephen, J · Mullick, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 159 words

Stephen and Mullick, JJ.—In this case the appellant decree-holder applied to enforce the conditions of an undertaking given by a surety that the judgment-debtor would apply in insolvency within a specified time, and that he would appear in Court whenever he was required to do so. Before the time of his appearance in Court had arrived, the judgment-debtor died, and it was therefore impossible for the surety to produce him. The lower Appellate Court has held that thereupon the decree-holder loses his remedy against the surety. This is the correct view of the law, for the event which occurred was not in contemplation of either party and, therefore, put an end to the obligation that there was under the contract. This view is in accordance with the ruling laid down in the case of Krishnan Nayar v. Ittinan Nayar ILR (1901) Mad. 637.

2.

The result is that this appeal on behalf of the decree-holder is dismissed with costs.