DORADLA SUBBAYYA SETTY Vs. ALAPATI SYAMALADOSS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order of the District Munsif sought to be reveled is correct. When the decree was passed it was not certain whether a compromise decree could extend beyond the subject matter of the suit Muthu Vijaya Raghunatha Udayana Tevar V/s. Thandavaraya Thmbiran, [1899] 22 Mad. 214 Natesa Chetti V/s. Vengu Nachiar [1909] 33 Mad. 102 and the decree in its present form was no doubt drawn up deliberately after due consideration of law. That opinion on the question has now modified (Ramaswami Naidu V/s. Subbaraya Tevar A. I. R. 1925 Mad. 1101 is no reason for amending the decree at this late date.

(2.) THE petition is dismissed with costs.