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

1997 Supreme(Pat) 574

S.N.JHA
Usha Devi – Appellant
Versus
Rajbanshi Rai – Respondent


Judgment

S.N.Jha, J.

1. This civil revision is by the plaintiff. He wanted correction as regards the name of the village in the decree. Petition filed to that effect under Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure was rejected by the Court below earlier on 6.9.95. He then filed similar application under Sec. 151 of the Code. The petition has been rejected by the impugned order.

2. From the petition filed in the Court below seeking amendment it appears that the petitioner wanted to mention village Shobhapur in place of Maulnapur. According to him wrong village had been mentioned in the plaint, as a result of which the mistake occurred in the decree.

3. I am satisfied that the case comes within the purview of Sec. 152 of the Code. The Court below, therefore, ought to have allowed the amendment at the first instance itself. The orders dated 6.9.95 and 24.4.96 are set aside. The Court below is directed to pass fresh order.

4. The application is allowed.

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