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

1993 Supreme(Ker) 262

T.V.RAMAKRISHNAN
Abdhu – Appellant
Versus
Assainar – Respondent


Judgment :-

Plaintiff in a suit for partition, where a preliminary decree for partition has already been passed and confirmed in appeal, filed an application in the final decree proceedings for amendment of the survey sub division number of the property described in the plaint schedule and the schedule attached to the preliminary decree. That application was allowed by the court under S.151 of the Code of Civil Procedure though the application itself was filed quoting the provisions contained in Order VI, Rule 17, C.P.C.

2. During the course of inspection by the Commissioner in the final decree proceedings, the Commissioner has with the assistance of the Taluk Surveyor identified the properties in the presence of all the parties concerned and found that the correct survey sub division number of the property is 8/2 and not 8/3 as wrongly shown in Ext. Al document and the schedules attached to the plaint and the preliminary decree. The petitioner has no case even in the memorandum of revision that the property in question is not comprised in R.S. No. 8/2 as reported by the Commissioner. The only case put forward is that such a correction of the survey sub division number cannot be eff







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