https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277532 An immovable property is sufficiently identifiable under Order VII Rule 3 CPC when the plaint describes it by boundaries, municipal number and map reference, because identification may rest on public-record numbers, boundaries or a plaint map. The objection that the suit property was not properly described therefore failed. On the appellate stage, Section 107 CPC and Order XLI Rule 24 CPC permit final disposal on the existing record where the evidence is sufficient, so remand was unnecessary. The appellate court was justified in deciding the matter finally and restoring the trial court decree. en-us Tue, 27 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Dec 2018 06:50:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277532 An immovable property is sufficiently identifiable under Order VII Rule 3 CPC when the plaint describes it by boundaries, municipal number and map reference, because identification may rest on public-record numbers, boundaries or a plaint map. The objection that the suit property was not properly described therefore failed. On the appellate stage, Section 107 CPC and Order XLI Rule 24 CPC permit final disposal on the existing record where the evidence is sufficient, so remand was unnecessary. The appellate court was justified in deciding the matter finally and restoring the trial court decree. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 27 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277532