High CourtsDivision Bench(1926) 10 MAD CK 0038

Upadrashta Latchayya vs Gudaparti Sitamma and Others

Madras High Court · Decided on 19 October 1926 · Citation: AIR 1927 Mad 1144 : 103 Ind. Cas. 384

HON’BLE JUDGES
Waller, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 80 words

Waller, J.—It is argued that even though the deed itself might be rectified, the decree passed upon it cannot be rectified. This contention cannot be upheld vide Bepin Krishna Ray v. Jogeshwar Ray A. I. R. 1921 Cal. 720 and Venkatarama Iyer v. Elumalai Naiker A. I. R. 1923 Mad. 442 The other argument, that there is no finding of mutual mistake is not supported by the judgments of the Courts below.

2.

The second appeal is dismissed with costs.