VENKATRAMANA BHAT Vs. ANANTHA BHAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioners are the defendants in a suit for partition. They assail the correctness of an order passed by the learned Sub Judge rejecting two applications filed by them under Ss. 151, 152, and 153 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (the Code) seeking amendment of the final judgment and decree to delete the direction for compounding interest at the rate of 12% on past and future profits.

(2.) In the preliminary decree, the defendants were directed to pay past and future profits. However, in the final decree, an additional direction was issued entitling the plaintiffs to interest at the rate of 12% per annum on such profits, with the interest calculated for one year being added to the principal for the succeeding year. Contending that this direction was impermissible, the revision petitioners filed two applications under Ss. 151, 152, and 153 of the Code seeking amendment of the final judgment and decree. The learned Sub Judge dismissed the applications, holding that the impugned clause in the final decree was passed on merits and, therefore, was not amenable to correction under the aforesaid provisions. It was further held that an application under those provisions cannot be used as a substitute for an appeal, revision, or review.

(3.) When the revision petitions came up for hearing, the learned Single Judge of this Court found that two other Single Benches of this Court had taken divergent views on the scope of the jurisdiction of civil courts under Ss. 151 and 152 of the Code. In view of the said conflict, the matters were referred to a Division Bench for authoritative consideration. The learned Single Judge noted that in Velayudhan Nair v. Kerala K.Y.Kuries (P) Ltd. (1987 (2) KLT 449), this Court held as follows: