1976 (3) TMI 250

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....No. 21 of the C.P.C. Hence, the petitioner herein filed I.A. No. 5736 of 1974 to direct the office to amend the preliminary decree dated 20-10-1970 in O.S. No. 3782 of 1967 to be in accordance with form No. 21 of C.P.C. The respondents herein opposed this amendment stating that the decree is in accordance with the prayer made in the plaint and the plaintiff is trying to fill up the lacuna in the suit in the guise of a prayer for amendment of the preliminary decree and that the office is correct in drafting the preliminary decree as per the judgment of the Court. The respondents further contended that if the petitioner herein is aggrieved by the drafting of the preliminary decree he can get it rectified either by way of filing an appeal or a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ties fixing the day on which the partnership shall stand dissolved or be deemed to have been dissolved, and directing such accounts to be taken, and other acts to be done, as it thinks fit. In Form No. 21 which is in appendix D for the purpose of drafting the decrees it is stated that the decree must declare the proportionate shares of the parties in the partnership. Mr. Himmatmal Mardia also pointed out Rule 114 of the Civil Rules of Practice and also Form No. 38 as to the drafting of the plaints in a suit for dissolution of partnership and accounts. He also read Form No. 49 to point out how the pleading should be in such a suit. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Raja Masilamani pointed out that the Court's jurisdiction cannot be invoked und....