SUBBARAYA CHETTY Vs. NACHIAR AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the finding of the District Judge it is clear that the defendant did receive the money. The learned Judge has, however, found that the suit was premature because of the terms of the unregistered mortgage bond. Granting that the terms of the bond are binding on the parties, having regard to the fact that immediately after the suit the money became payable, we think that it is undesirable that the plaintiff should be compelled to institute another suit for the money. money. The principle of Chinta Hararan Das v. Radha Charan Poddar 37 Ind. Cas. 962 and of the decision of this Court in Sethrucherla Rama Chandra v. Maharajah of Jeypore 34 Ind. Cas. 411 : (1916) M.W.N. 354 : 19 M.L.T. 360 in which it was held that Courts have power to grant a decree where a cause of action arose subsequent to the suit, is applicable to this case. Following these decisions and having regard to the special circumstances of this case, we reverse the decree of the District Judge and restore that of the District Munsif, except as to costs. Each party will bear his own costs throughout.