P.V.RAJAMANNAR, JAGADISAN
C. V. Venkataraman – Appellant
Versus
C. S. Lakshmi Animal – Respondent
This appeal must be allowed not on the merits but on the ground that the learned Judge had no jurisdiction to grant a declaration such as that which he granted to the respondent on an application purporting to be under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, practically varying the consent decree in a suit, C.S. No. 106 of 1938. That decree has become final and it is not the case of the respondent that because of the passing of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, that decree has become void. All that she says is that by reason of the provisions of that Act she has become entitled absolutely to the property in which she had under the consent decree only an estate for life. The question no doubt depends upon the construction of section 14 (2) of the Act. But so far as we are aware, there is no provision in the Code of Civil Procedure or anywhere else which warrants an appli-tion as that on which the judgment under appeal was passed. The application was for the grant of a declaration that the respondent’s right and interest in certain property had become enlarged into full and absolute rights as against the limited rights granted to the respondent under the decree. C
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.