S.115 Of Civil Procedure Code vs By Advs
2021 Latest Caselaw 3148 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

    THURSDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 8TH MAGHA, 1942

                       CRP.No.366 OF 2020

S.115 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, AGAINST ORDER IN I.A.NO. 780/2019
   IN OS 154/2004 DATED.9.10.2020 OF SUB COURT,KOTTARAKKARA

                          ------------


APPLICANT/1ST DEFENDANT/PETITIONER:

             SHEEJA ASOKAN
             AGED 50 YEARS
             D/O. THANKAMMA, LEKSHMI BHAVAN, IRATTAKALAYIL,
             MUDIYOORKONAM P.O, PANDALAM VILLAGE,
             PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN 689 501.

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI
             SRI.JEEVAN MATHEW MANAYANI

RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENTS:

      1      AISHA BEEVI
             CHARUVILA PUTHENVEEDU, CHADAYAMANGALAM MURI,
             CHADAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE-691 534, NOW RESIDING AT
             AISHA BEEVI, W/O. NAZEEMUDDIN, PARATTAYIL VEEDU,
             AZAD NAGAR, 179 KAYYOLAKKAL, IRAVIPURAM P.O,
             KOLLAM-691 011

      2      THE KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.
             REP. BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, REGISTERED OFFICE AT
             BHADRATHA, THRISSUR 680 020.

      3      THE BRANCH MANAGER,
             THE KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.
             (KSFE), PUNALUR-691 305

             R2-3 BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN

     THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 28.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
                    SATHISH NINAN, J.
          ==================
                 C. R. P. No.366 of 2020
          ==================
         Dated this the 28th day of January, 2021

                                 ORDER

An application for correction of the judgment,

filed under Section 152 read with Section 151 of

the Code of Civil Procedure, was dismissed by the

trial court, against which this revision petition.

2. The petitioner is the first defendant in the

suit. The petitioner sought for correction of the

judgment on the ground that Exts.B1 and B2

documents marked in the suit were not properly

considered while passing the judgment.

3. As rightly noticed by the trial court,

Section 152 comes into play only for correction of

accidental clerical or arithmetical mistakes, and

does not have any application on the case at hand. C. R. P. No.366 of 2020

Even that apart, the trial court has noticed that

Exts.B1 and B2 documents were meticulously

considered and discussed in the suit. The order

impugned suffers from no infirmity.

The civil revision petition lacks merit and is

accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-

SATHISH NINAN JUDGE

kns/-

//True Copy//

P.S. to Judge