Sir John Edge, C.J and Brodhurst, J.:— In the lower appellate Court the plaintiff in the suit filed an appeal. The defendants filed another appeal. The defendants' appeal was heard by Munshi Kashi Prasad, who was Subordinate Judge of Cawnpore, on the 13th February, 1883. In that appeal the defendants raised the question as to the title of the plaintiff and as to their own title to the land in dispute. The issues in appeal as to the title were found on the facts against the defendants, that is, in that appeal the then Subordinate Judge found that the plaintiff had title and the defendants [579] none. The plaintiff's appeal came on to be heard subsequently before Munshi Piare Lal as Officiating Subordinate Judge of Cawnpore on the 8th March, 1888, and he, treating the findings in the other appeal as operating as res judicata, decreed the plaintiff's appeal with costs. The appeal now before us is an appeal from the decree of Munshi Piare Lal. It appears to us that he took a correct view of the law, and although s. 13 would not apply, still the principle of res judicata applied. S. 13 of the Code is not exhaustive, as was pointed by their Lordships of the Privy Council in the case of Ram Kirpal v. Rup Kuari. We dismiss the appeal with costs.
Appeal dismissed.