Sunday, 19, May, 2024
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Mr. Syed Zaheeruddin vs Syed Sulthan Mohiuddin
2021 Latest Caselaw 192 Tel

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 192 Tel
Judgement Date : 29 January, 2021

Telangana High Court
Mr. Syed Zaheeruddin vs Syed Sulthan Mohiuddin on 29 January, 2021
Bench: A.Rajasheker Reddy
       HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

               Civil Revision Petition No.113 of 2021

ORDER:

This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order, dated

29.02.2020, passed in I.A. No.213 of 2020 in O.S No.487 of 1995 by

the VIII Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.

Nagar, wherein and whereby the Court below ordered notice in the

application filed by the petitioners under Section 152 CPC for

rectification of the decree in O.S No.487 of 1995, dated 29.10.2010.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that with regard to

ordering notice dated 29.02.2020 to respondents No.1 to 3, who are

plaintiffs in the suit, the petitioner has no objection since relief is

granted to them in the suit and with regard to ordering notice to other

respondents by way of the impugned order is objectionable to the

petitioner because no relief is granted to them in the suit. He further

submits that now the relief sought in the application is rectifying the

decree in terms of the judgment. He also submits that the judgment

and decree have become final, as such the other respondents have no

say in the matter for rectification of the decree in terms of judgment

and that the petitioner has specifically raised the same before the

Court below, but the Court below brushing aside the same, issued

notice to respondents who are not necessary parties to the petition. 2

4. A reading of the judgment goes to show that in paragraph-27

the relief is granted to petitioner herein, who is defendant No.21, but

the operative portion of the judgment is silent about the same. Be that

as it may, since the rectification application is pending, it is for the

Court below to consider the same. Since it is asserted that the

respondents other than respondent Nos.1 to 3 are not necessary

parties, there is no finding of the Court below and the notice is ordered

to other respondents though the issue is said to have been raised

before the trial Court.

5. In view of the same, it is open for the petitioners to make a

necessary application bringing the above said facts to the notice of the

trail Court and the trial Court is directed to consider the same and pass

orders and thereafter, dispose of the application for rectification of the

decree. This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the

case.

6. The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with the above

directions. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any

pending, shall stand closed.

__________________________ A. RAJASHEKER REDDY, J January 29, 2021

KTL

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 
 
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2024

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2024', Apply Now!

 
 
 
 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

Publish Your Article

Campus Ambassador

Media Partner

Campus Buzz