SAROJINI N VITTAL Vs. V CHANIYAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff is the appellant. The suit for redemption of the plaint 'b' Schedule property and for par tition -of l/3lst share of the plaintiff, was dismissed by the trial court on the question of limitation and the same was confirmed by the appellate court. Hence, the plaintiffs are before this court.

(2.) AS the suit was disposed of on preliminary issue alone by the trial court, and the appellate court, while rejecting the application for amendment of the plaint, considered the question of limitation only, it has become necessary for me to consider the question of limitation alone,

(3.) BUT it must be pointed out that the courts below have committed an error in not following the amendment to Order 14 Rule 2 cpc. The responsibility of the court is to decide on all issues except as provided for in sub-Rule (2) of Or. 14 Rule 2. It is incumbent upon the court to adjudicate the case on all issues and render finding on all issues though the decision may depend upon one issue alone. This salient rule must be strictly followed