TRIPURARI MISHRA Vs. MOST RAJPATI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision by the plaintiff is directed against the order dated 26-8-94 passed by the Vth Subordinate Judge, Siwan in Title Partition Suit No. 160 of 1981 allowing the petition of defendants Ist party under Order VI, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short, the Code) for inclusion of certain items of property in the written statement and the preliminary decree. The defendants by the same very petition had also prayed for deletion of certain other items of property from the preliminary decree. The Court below, however, did not accede to that prayer.

(2.) It is not necessary to set out the facts of the case for the purpose of disposal of this revision. In fact, no argument on the factual aspect of the case was made by the counsel for either party. Arguments were made on a question of law, whether in a partition suit, after preliminary decree is passed, addition of further items of property for partition by metes and bounds is permissible or not.

(3.) Mr. Manan Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the Court has no jurisdiction to add to the schedule of the properties which are subject-matter of the partition suit as mentioned in the preliminary decree. According to him, it would require a full-fledged adjudication which is not possible at the stage of preparation of the final decree. He placed reliance on Muthangi Ayyana v. Muthangi Jaggarao, AIR 1977 SC 292; Awadhendra Prasad Narayan Singh v. Raghubansmani Prasad Narayan Singh, AIR 1979 Patna 50 and Sajani Bewa v. Kartik Sahu, AIR 1981 Orissa 157.