Wanchoo, C.J.—This is an appeal by Satya Narain who was defendant in the suit against the judgment and decree of the Civil Judge, Ratangarh.

2. The suit was filed by Balchand and other against Nemichand and his sons Ramprasad and Satya Narain on the 27th January, 1949. It was based on a foreign judgment passed by the Bombay High Court on the 11th March, 1948, against the three defendants. The judgment and decree of the Bombay High Court was based on a compromise between the parties. The suit was resisted by the three defendants, and two main points were urged on their behalf; (1) that the advocate who compromised the suit in the Bombay High Court had no power to do so and, therefore, the judgment dated 11th March, 1948, was not binding on the defen-dants and could not be treated as a conclusive judgment within the meaning of sec. 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure; and (2) that in any case, even if the advocate had power to compromise, a judgment based on a compromise could not be conclusive under sec. 13 C.P.C. in view of clause (b) of that section. Both these points were decided against the defendants, and the trial court passed a decree in accordance with the foreign judgment. The

Click Here to Read the rest of this document