JUDGMENT

Hariprasad, J.

This is an appeal by the defeated defendant.

2. Apart from the factual issues, the prime legal question arising for determination in this appeal is whether an assignment deed can be rectified under Section 26 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (for brevity, “the Act”) without pleading and proving fraud or mutual mistake of the parties? Ancillary question is whether a decree declaring that the property shown in the plaint schedule is the property assigned to the plaintiff through Ext.A1 (the document sought to be rectified) will salvage the situation in favour of the plaintiff? Of course, other reliefs sought in the plaint are dependent on the findings on these issues.

3. Short facts pleaded in the plaint are thus: Respondent is the absolute owner of 22 cents of land in resurvey Nos.63/2 and 196 of RFA No.11/2015 2 Chelamattom Village and a double storied building bearing No.PMC/XXI/339. He purchased the property from the appellant as per Ext.A1 sale deed. The dispute in this case is centered around this property and the building. Respondent contended that he purchased the property from the appellant for a consideration of `52 lakhs, by availing a loan from the Sta