AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 165 wordsMullick, J.—Although I express the opinion with some hesitation, I think this is a case that is covered by Section 151, Civil Procedure Code.
This Court when hearing the second appeal under Order XLI, Rule 11, would have, I take it, had jurisdiction to order an amendment of the plaint u/s 151, Civil Procedure Code, and the dismissal of the appeal does not, in my opinion, alter the Court''s powers now. This being an obviously clerical error, the Court should, I think, in the interests of justice, direct that the plaint and the relevant decrees thereafter be amended so that the mortgaged property be described as Khata No. 435, Khasra Nq. 994, instead of Khata No. 439 and Khasra No. 194.
The inherent powers of the Court are not to be lightly invoked and in this case it is clear that the petitioners should pay the costs of the application.
The hearing fee is fixed at Rs. 32.
Bucknill, J.--I agree.