IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J.
Suresh Jindal and Another - Appellant
Versus
Usha Jindal and Others - Respondent
Civil Revision No. 6350 of 2017
Decided On : 09-04-2019
CPC - Correction in Plaint - Sections 151, 152 and 153 - Summary: The court discussed the correction in the plaint, judgment, and decree under Sections 151, 152, and 153 of the CPC. It highlighted the legal provisions and their interpretations, emphasizing the court's power to correct clerical errors and the purpose of these provisions in advancing the cause of justice.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration of joint possession of land. Due to a clerical error in the plaint, the suit was decreed in their favor. They subsequently filed an application for correction of the error.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the application for correction, emphasizing the power of the court to rectify clerical errors in the judgment and decree.
Issues: The main issue was the correction of the clerical error in the plaint, judgment, and decree.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on legal precedents and interpretations of Sections 151, 152, and 153 of the CPC to support its decision to allow the correction.
Final Decision: The revision petition was allowed, and the trial court was directed to carry out the necessary correction in the plaint, judgment, and decree.
RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J.
1. Petitioners have preferred this revision petition against the order dated 21.08.2017 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) Ambala, vide which the application filed by petitioners under Sections 151, 152 and 153 CPC for correction in the plaint, judgment and decree was dismissed.
2. Brief facts are that the plaintiffs/petitioners filed a suit for declaration to the effect that they were in joint possession to the extent of 1/6th share i.e. 107/643th share along with the defendants in the land bearing Khewat/Khatauni No.38/54, Khasra Nos.27//2 (8-0), 3/4 (1-7), 8(7-18), 9(8-0) and 12/1(6-18) total land measuring 32 Kanals 3 Marlas situated in the revenue estate of village Kakru, Hadbast No.31, Tehsil & District Ambala as per jamabandi for the year 1996-97 on the basis of inheritance of the estate of Sh. Pawan Kumar deceased as held in Civil Appeal titled 'Sukhdev Parshad & others vs. Suresh Jindal & others', decided on 31.10.2002 by the Addl. District Judge, Patiala with a consequential relief of declaration, declaring the sale deed to be null and void executed by Sukhdev Parshad (deceased) represented by the defendants No.1 and 2 (legal representatives) registered vide writing No.6448 in the office of Sub-Registrar, Ambala in respect of 16 Kanals 2 Marlas of land, to the extent of share of the plaintiffs i.e. 1/6th share in 32 Kanals 3 Marlas of land. Plaintiffs also sought further declaration regarding correction of Jamabandi for the year 1996-97 and subsequent revenue records.
3. Inadvertently in the plaint, Khasra No.27//2(8-0) was mentioned in place of Khasra No.21//2(8-0). The other khasra numbers remained the same and total land i.e. 32 Kanals 3 Marlas also remained the same. All the sons of Chajju Ram including Pawan Kumar jointly purchased 32 Kanals 3 Marlas of land vide two separate sale deeds in equal shares. Sale deed No.2602 dated 07.07.1982 was executed in respect of 16 Kanals 3 Marlas of land from one Gajinder Kumar son of Nand Lal. The khasra numbers mentioned in the aforesaid sale deed are 21//2(8-0), 3/4(1-7), 8(7-18), 9(8-0), 12/1(6-18) i.e. total land measuring 32 Kanals 3 Marlas. Out of the aforesaid land, Khasra Nos.21//3/4(1-7), 8(7-18) and 21/12/1 (6-18) from the total land 16 Kanals 3 Marlas were sold to Sukhdev Parsad, Pawan Kumar, Sham Bihari and Pardeep Kumar for a consideration of Rs.24,500/-.
4. Perusal of the record would show that the sale deed No.2603 dated 07.07.1982 was executed for 16 Kanals 3 Marlas of land in respect of Khasra Nos.21//2(8-0) and 21//9(8- 0) for a total sale consideration of Rs.24,500/- in favour of Sukhdev Parsad, Pawan Kumar, Sham Bihari and Pardeep Kumar. After having purchased the aforesaid land, Sukhdev Parsad sold 16 Kanals 2 Marlas of land in favour of Gurbax Singh/defendant No.3 vide sale deed dated 08.02.2002 for consideration. Recital of the sale would show that Khasra Nos.21//3/4 and 8 were sold in favour of Gurbax Singh for consideration of Rs.4,25,000/-. In the aforesaid sale deed also the total land was shown to be 32 Kanals 3 Marlas comprised in khasra numbers as shown in preceding paras out of which land measuring 16 Kanals 2 Marlas was sold.
5. In the written statement filed by defendant No.3/respondents No.3, the factum of land comprised in Khasra No.21//2(8-0) has not been denied, rather evasive reply was filed. The factum of purchase of 16 Kanals 2 Marlas of land by defendant No.3 from Sukhdev Parsad through registered sale deed No.6448 dated 08.02.2002 for a consideration of Rs.4,25,000/- was pleaded in the written statement. In the aforesaid sale deed, 16 Kanals 2 Marlas of land was purchased by defendant No.2 from total land measuring 32 Kanals 3 Marlas in which Khasra No.21//2(8-0) was one of the khasra number. Description of Khasra No.21//2(8-0) was never in dispute in all the three sale deeds as mentioned above.
6. The sale deeds were executed on the basis of jamabandi for the year 1996-97. As per the said jamabandi Sukhdev
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.