UMA DEVI Vs. CHANDRA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit was decreed and the property was par titioned equally between the plaintiff and the defendant. While decreeing the suit, the Court directed that a preliminary decree be drawn, against which, the defendant preferred an appeal which was dismissed in default and a restoration application has been filed which is pending. In the meanwhile, an application was filed before the Trial Court to the effect that an Amin's report be called to ascertain the share of the parties as per the decree. THE Amin sub mitted a report defining the shares of the property. An objection was filed by the judgment debtor which has been rejected by the impugned order and the Trial Court directed that a final decree be prepared. THE defendant, being s aggrieved has filed the present writ petition.

(2.) IN my opinion, the writ petition is not maintainable. The order of the Trial Court partakes the nature of a decree as defined under section 2 (2) of the C.P.C. IN S. Satnam Singh and others v. Surender Kaur and another, 2009 (74) ALR 796 the Supreme Court held that in order to determine as to whether an order passed by the Court is a decree or not, it must satisfy the following test, namely : (a) There must be an adjudication. (b) Such an adjudication must have been given in a suit. (c) It must have determined the rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in controversy of the suit. (d) Such determination must be conclusive in nature. (e) There must be a formal expression of such adjudication.