A sues B for specific performance of an agreement for the sale to him of B's land, and obtains a decree. In execution of the decree, A is put in possession of a portion only of the land, as it is found that the rest of the land did not belong to B, but to B's son.
A. A subsequent suit by A against B for recovery of a portion of the price to the extent of the son's share is not barred under rule 2, the cause of action being the same
B. A subsequent suit by A against B for recovery of a portion of the price to the extent of the son's share is not barred under rule 2, the cause of action being entirely distinct
C. Either A or B
D. None of these
Answer: Option B

Join The Discussion