Judgement

Petition.

The appellants in the above-mentioned appeal from the High Court at Calcutta petitioned the Judicial Committee for leave to withdraw the appeal upon the terms of an agreement by way of compromise. The appellants included a lunatic and a minor, and another minor was one of the respondents; the lunatic appeared by his next friend, and the minors were duly represented by guardians ad litem.

The proceedings out of which the appeal arose were taken by the appellants in execution of a decree which they had obtained against the respondents in 1906 upon a bond hypothecating certain properties to secure a sum of Rs. 25,000. The respondents raised objections under Order xxxiv., rr. 14, 15, to the execution. The trial judge held that the objections were valid, and that the proper remedy was by a suit; his decision was affirmed on an appeal to the High Court.

The present appeal was preferred to His Majesty in Council.

The parties, or their representatives in the litigation, having entered into an agreement by way of

Law. Rep. 48 Ind. App. 241 ( 1920- 1921)

Gobinda C handra Pal V. Kailash C handra Pal 102

compromise, petitioned the High Court for a certificate that the comprom