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

1948 Supreme(Mad) 124

RAJAMANNAR
Chaganty Katamraju – Appellant
Versus
Madavarappu Paripurnanandam – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
P. Somasundaram for Petitioner.
V.V. Sastri for Respondent.

Judgment.-

This is an application to amend the description of item 1 of the plaint schedule and the decree schedule in a suit which was ultimately disposed of by this Court in S.A. No. 1607 of 1945, by substituting for old survey No. 23 corresponding to Re-Survey No. 17/1 Re-survey No. 23/1 corresponding to revision Survey No. 27/1. The petitioner was the plaintiff in a suit which was for recovery of several items of property on the allegation that they were properties which originally belonged to one Chelamayya and the plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 were the nearest reversioners of the said Chelamayya. The third defendant was made a party as evidently interested in item 1, and the case proceeded in both the lower Courts and in this Court on the footing that the third defendant was interested in item 1 of the plaint schedule. After the disposal of the second appeal by this Court, the plaintiff discovered that an error had crept into the description of the first item. The description in the plaint schedule was that it comprised 1 acre 35 cents out of R.S. No. 17/1 corresponding to Re-Survey No. 23. The correct description should have been Re-Survey No. 23/1 corresponding to Revisi









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