Skip to content


Musammat Bhagwati Devi Vs. Sanker Lal and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported in95Ind.Cas.649
AppellantMusammat Bhagwati Devi
RespondentSanker Lal and anr.
Cases ReferredAsma Bibi v. Ahmad Husain
Excerpt:
civil procedure code (act v of 1908), section 152, order xli, rule 11 - appeal, dismissal of--amendment of decree-- forum, proper. - - 584. in view of these rulings the learned district judge bad no jurisdiction to amend the decree......appellate court which can amend the decree. i refer to the full bench case of muhammad sulaiman: khan v. muhammad yar khan 11 a. 267 : a.w.n. (1889) 55 : 13 ind. 7ur. 427 : 6 ind. dec. (n. s.) 598. which, was. followed in asma bibi v. ahmad husain 30 a. 290 : a.w.n. (1908) 109 : 5 a.l.j. 584. in view of these rulings the learned district judge bad no jurisdiction to amend the decree. it has been pressed on me that the opposite party ought to have raised this question of jurisdiction before the district judge and did not do so and i have been pressed to refrain from interfering on this ground. it appears to me, however, that on the merits the decree as prepared was right and that the district judge was wrong in amending it.2. i accordingly allow this revision and set aside the order of.....
Judgment:

1. This is an application in- revision under Section 115, C. P. C., against an order amending a decree on the ground that the learned Judge acted without jurisdiction. The ground is based on the fact that the decree amended had been the subject of appeal to this Court, which appeal was dismissed under Order XLI, Rule 11. There is direct authority-in two cases of this Court that under such circumstances it is only the final Appellate Court which can amend the decree. I refer to the Full Bench case of Muhammad Sulaiman: Khan v. Muhammad Yar Khan 11 A. 267 : A.W.N. (1889) 55 : 13 Ind. 7ur. 427 : 6 Ind. Dec. (N. S.) 598. which, was. Followed in Asma Bibi v. Ahmad Husain 30 A. 290 : A.W.N. (1908) 109 : 5 A.L.J. 584. In view of these rulings the learned District Judge bad no jurisdiction to amend the decree. It has been pressed on me that the opposite party ought to have raised this question of jurisdiction before the District Judge and did not do so and I have been pressed to refrain from interfering on this ground. It appears to me, however, that on the merits the decree as prepared was right and that the District Judge was wrong in amending it.

2. I accordingly allow this revision and set aside the order of the Court below. The applicant will get his costs of this application.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //