AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
4 paragraphs · 115 words
Das, J.—The only point that has been argued before us is that there was no waiver of the legal right of the petitioner. In my opinion, there was. He did compromise the suit on an agreement that in default of payment of the decretal money, the decree-holder would be entitled to realize the sum by the sale of the attached holding. There was a clear representation made to the decree-holder that his occupancy holding was attachable by the judgment-debtor. The decree-holder acted upon that representation and changed his position to his detriment. In my opinion the judgment-debtor must make good his representation.
2.
This application is dismissed with costs.
3.
Adami, J.
4.
I agree.