Arulanantham Et Al V. Attorney General

1950 Present: Dias S.P.J. and Gunasekara J.

ARULANANTHAM et al., Appellants, and THE ATTORNEY-
GENERAL, Respondent

S. C. 84 Inty.-D. C. Jaffna, 4,842

Contract-Suretyship-Separate agreements in two documents-Joinder of parties and causes of action-Meaning of " cause of action "-Civil Procedure Code, ss. 5, 14.

Where, in a contract involving suretyship, the parties executed two separate documents to embody their agreements and the obligee sued the obligor and the sureties in the same action-

Held, that the plaintiff's action was not bad for misjoinder of parties and causes of action. The two documents were in reality one document and created one cause of action.

APPEAL from a judgment of the District Court, Jaffna.

N. E. Weerasooria, K.C., with H. W. Tambiah, for the defendant appellant.

M. Tiruchelvam, Crown Counsel, for the plaintiff respondent.

Cur. adv. vult.

June 14, 1950. DIAS S.P.J.-

Solomon Arulanandam, being desirous that his son David should qualify as an Irrigation Officer, entered into two agreements marked " A ' and " B " bearing the same date, May 8, 1944, with the Director of Irrigation acting as the agent

Click Here to Read the rest of this document