SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1976 Supreme(Kar) 37

CHANDRASHEKARAIAH
SHANKERGOUDA – Appellant
Versus
GARANGOUDA – Respondent


Advocates:
Balakrishna, N.SANTOSH HEGDE

( 1 ) HAS the Court power under S. 152 C. P. C. , to amend its judgment and decree sq as to correct a clerical or inadvertent error although such error had occurred on account of a mistake of the parties themselves in the pleadings? This question arises out of the application, I. A. II, made by the appellant. He has prayed for amendment of the judgment and decree in the above appeal, by substituting the figure 203 for the figure 304 denoting the survey number of the land in Kuralagere village which I held in this second appeal, to be the exclusive property of the appellant and directed its exclusion in the partition of the joint family properties between the appellant and the respondents.

( 2 ) IN the affidavit accompanying I. A. II, the appellant has alleged thus: In the plaint he had stated that the land bearing Survey No. 304 of kuralagere was purchased by him out of his separate funds and that it was not liable for partition. The correct survey number of that land is 203. It is only by a clerical mistake that he had stated the survey number of that land as 304. In para 8 of the written statement of plaintiff-2 who was later transposed as defendant-4 he had expresssly pleaded th












Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top