https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194451 A suit for eviction was not rendered non-maintainable merely because the real owners, substituted after the original plaintiff's death, were described as heirs rather than owners. The Supreme Court noted that the suit had been prosecuted by persons entitled to sue in their own right, and the objection concerned only the form of description in the pleadings and cause title. That misdescription was a formal error, caused no prejudice, and did not affect the merits or jurisdiction. Under Section 99 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and with the possibility of correction under Order 1 Rule 10, the decree could not be disturbed on that ground. en-us Wed, 21 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Sep 2017 11:00:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194451 A suit for eviction was not rendered non-maintainable merely because the real owners, substituted after the original plaintiff's death, were described as heirs rather than owners. The Supreme Court noted that the suit had been prosecuted by persons entitled to sue in their own right, and the objection concerned only the form of description in the pleadings and cause title. That misdescription was a formal error, caused no prejudice, and did not affect the merits or jurisdiction. Under Section 99 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and with the possibility of correction under Order 1 Rule 10, the decree could not be disturbed on that ground. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 21 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194451