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

1982 Supreme(Ori) 65

R.C.PATNAIK
MADHU SETHI – Appellant
Versus
BISHNU SETHI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
H.B.SVAIN, M.R.MOHANTY, P.K.Ray, S.C.MOHAPATRA, S.S.SWAIN

R. C. PATNAIK, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a plaintiff's revision directed against rejection of his application filed under Section 152 read with Section 151 of the Civil P. C. for correction of the judgment and decree.

( 2 ) THE original petitioner instituted Title Suit No. 70/85 of 1971-73 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Sonepur for declaration of title and that he was entitled to possess the suit property. During the pendency of the suit, a proceeding under Section 145 of the Criminal P. C. terminated in favour of the original opposite party declaring the possession of the opposite party on the day of the preliminary decree. So, the original petitioner was obliged to seek recovery of possession by way of amendment of the plaint. His prayer for amendment was allowed by order dated 2-7-1974 and the original petitioner was directed to pay additional court fee on the relief of recovery of possession and he paid the additional court-fee. On 27-2-1975 the suit was decreed.

( 3 ) IT was discovered later on that though leave had been granted to amend the plaint, the petitioner did not carry out the amendment and the decree that was passed granted the reliefs as per the prayer in the orig






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