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

2012 Supreme(Pat) 96

SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH
Santosh Kumar Singh S/o Sri Krishnadeo Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar through Chief Secretary – Respondent


ORDER

1. The defendant-petitioner prays for quashing order dated 03.08.2010 passed by Sub-Ordinate Judge-II, Patna in Title Suit no. 439 of 2006, whereby he allowed the petition dated 01.12.2007 (wrongly typed in order as 30.11.2007) filed under Section 152 and 153 of C.P.C. for making amendment in the plaint, compromise petition as well as in the compromise decree.

2. The trial court allowed the said petition on the ground that the error occurring in the plaint, compromise petition as well as compromise decree were clerical in nature.

3. The plaintiffs-respondents filed title suit no.439 of 2006 for specific performance of the contract for sale of Schedule-1 property in their favour and to further direct the defendant/petitioner to admit execution and registration of the requisite sale deed. The plaintiffs-respondents prayed in alternative for an award / decree of Rs.1,70,000/- + 23,000/- + 6300/- totaling Rs. 1,99,300/- along with 12 per cent interest per annum till its realization. The details of the property is described in Schedule-1, which is quoted herein below for easy reference:

SCHEDULE-1

Mauza Tauzi No. Khata No. S.P. No. Area

Duzara





































































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