Bench allowed Civil Revision Petition regarding erroneous property description in final decree under Article 227. Directed decree holder to file fresh application with correct property description.
Petitioner allowed liberty to file fresh application with correct property description; connected miscellaneous petition closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 23.03.2017
CORAM : THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
CRP(PD)(MD)No.1103 of 2015 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2015
A.Romeo Juliet
... Petitioner/Respondent/Defendant
vs.
K.Srinivasan ... Respondent/Petitioner/Plaintiff
Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, against the fair and decreetal order dated 13.10.2014 passed in I.A.No.447 of 2013 in O.S.No.145 of 2010 on the file of the II Additional District Court, Trichirappalli.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar For Respondent : Mr.S.k.Mani.
ORDER
The decree holder who is the respondent in this Revision Petition, has filed I.A.No.447 of 2013 to pass final decree in his mortgage suit wherein preliminary decree was passed on 08.11.2012, in the said application, the schedule of property was not properly described and it was different to that of the description of the property described in the preliminary decree. However, erroneously, the final decree was drafted describing wrong description of the property. Hence, the present revision petition is filed on the ground that the Lower Court failed to see the description of the property in the suit in O.S.No.145 of 2010 and the description of the property mentioned in I.A.No.447 of 2013 and without noting the fact that the two description are entirely different, final decree has been passed. The learned counsel for the respondent fairly submitted that there is some error in the description of the property and the final decree was passed as such.
2.Taking note of the submission of the respective learned counsel the revision petition is allowed. The decree holder is at https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ liberty to take out fresh application by giving the correct description of the property. With the above directions the
2
Revision Petition is allowed and connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS I)
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
The Judge,
II Additional District Court, Tiruchirappalli.
+1cc to Mr.R.SureshKumar,Advocate,SR.17746
CRP(PD)(MD)No.1103 of 2015 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2015 23.03.2017
MM/MYR
kk/SV MMS/20.04.2016-2P-3C
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Civil Revision Petitioner should be allowed to correct errors in the description of property in the final decree.
Whether the Lower Court failed to note the discrepancy between the property description in the preliminary decree and the final decree.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
A. Romeo Juliet
K. Srinivasan
Dr. Justice G. Jayachandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
