O R D E R

The second and third defendants in O.S.No.71 of 2017 which was pending on the file of the District Munsif Court at Perundurai of the Revision Petitioners herein.

2. O.S.No.71 of 2017 had been filed seeking a Judgment and Decree for partition of the suit property and for separate possession. The defendants had joined proceedings and had filed their written statement. Thereafter, the parties entered into a compromise and a compromise decree in accordance with the compromise had also been passed on 18.08.2017. It is mentioned in the plaint that the second item of suit property was described as being in correct Survey Number 249B. That was the Survey Number given in the decree also.

3. Subsequently, I.A.(CFR) No.1114 of 2020 had been filed by the Revision Petitioners herein seeking to amend the Survey Number of Item No.2 from 249B to 247B and further include the Re-Survey Number

269-1.

4. It is stated that the defendants filed such an application since in the compromise decree that particular property was allotted to the defendants. The plaintiffs did not filed any objections. However, the learned Judge rejected the said application on the ground that the parties are attempting to substitute a new property to the plaint and thereafter the petition lacks bonafide.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioners and the learned counsel for the Respondents.

6. It is stated in unison that there is no substitution of any other property and that there was a correction in the Survey Number of the property already mentioned in the plaint. The application in that regard had been filed by the defendants only because that particular property was allotted to the defendants. The Survey Number given in the plaint had been incorporated in the compromise decree. It is stated that it should actually be 247B and not 249B. It is also stated that the Re-

Survey Number is 269-1.

7. I hold that permitting such amendment as there is no substitution of a new property and that there is only correction of the description of the properties. It is the correction of the Survey Number and the mistake had happened bonafide at the initial stage of proceedings.

8. In the present case, I am not able to understand how the learned District Munsif had come to a conclusion that the entire property is substituted the said property.

9. The Revision Petition is allowed with a direction to the District Munsif Court, Perundurai to take the unnumbered I.A.(CFR No.1114 of 2020) on record and permit necessary steps to be taken to amend the plaint in O.S.No.71 of 2017 particularly with respect to Item No.2 property in the schedule and later to also amend the compromise decree dated 18.08.2017.

10. With the said observations, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. No order as to costs.

25.06.2021 Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No rna To The District Munsif Court, Perundurai.

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

rna

25.06.2021