H. R. KRISHNAN, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application in revision by the plaintiff in a suit from the order of the trial Judge summarily refusing to record a compromise without investigating the defendant's allegations that it had been brought about by misrepresentation. The applicant wants at this stage that the allegations of the; defendant justifying the non-recording of the award should be investigated; whereas the defendant-non-applicant urges that whatever the merits of his allegations, the conduct of the plaintiff itself shows that he had tacitly repudiated the compromise. The question is of considerable theoretical interest though ill practice it might arise only very rarely. A party to a compromise has, after entering into it, continued prosecuting his suit, leading evidence, even without mentioning the compromise; can be at a later stage fall back on it and invite the Court to record it, or is he deemed by his own conduct to have repudiated it and is as such not entitled later on to invoke it in his own favour?

( 2 ) THE facts of the case are the following : On account of some old transactions the plaintiff-applicant brought a suit in 1949 for the realisation of Rs. 756/- and in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document