TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal dismissed: Court upholds amendments to correct mortgage deed inaccuracies; costs imposed on appellant.</h1> <h3>Ram Chandra Sahu Versus Jamna Prasad</h3> The appeal challenging the refusal to set aside ex parte proceedings was dismissed, with costs imposed on the appellant. The HC upheld the lower Ct's ... - Issues:Appeal against order refusing to set aside ex parte proceedings under O. 9, R. 13, and Ss. 141 and 151, Civil P.C.; Correction of mistakes in judgment, decree, or order under S. 152, Civil P.C.; Exercise of inherent power under S. 151 of the Code for the ends of justice.Analysis:The judgment-debtor, who had mortgaged five villages but faced inaccuracies in the description of the mortgaged villages in the mortgage deed, filed an appeal against the refusal to set aside ex parte proceedings. The lower Court had allowed amendments to correct the mistakes in conformity with the mortgage deed of 1st January 1916. The Court emphasized its duty to rectify mistakes in judgments, decrees, or orders under S. 152, Civil P.C., and its inherent power under S. 151 to ensure justice. The amendments were deemed necessary for the ends of justice, as both parties admitted the corrections were made in conformity with the original mortgage deed.In the case of Aziz Ullah Khan v. Court of Wards, Shahjehanpur, it was established that the wide language of S. 152, Civil P.C., encompassed corrections required due to mistakes made by the parties, not limited to powers under S. 152 alone. The Court could exercise extensive powers under Ss. 151 and 153, Civil P.C., to rectify errors essential for justice. Similarly, in Shaim Lal v. Moona Kuer, it was held that under Ss. 151 and 152, Civil P.C., the Court had the authority to amend the plaint, judgment, and decree to rectify mistakes, ensuring accuracy in legal documents. The judgment-debtor's plea regarding the purchaser's rights from the original decree-holder was deemed premature, as it could be raised during execution of the decree purchased from the decree-holder.Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, and costs were imposed on the appellant. The Court affirmed the lower Court's decision to allow the necessary amendments and rejected the objections raised by the judgment-debtor, emphasizing the importance of correcting mistakes for the proper administration of justice in legal proceedings.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
