Preliminary Decree Partly Final, Execution Maintainable — (2026) INSC 502
The Decree dated 13.04.2012 is not merely a preliminary decree; it is partly final as it conclusively determines the Appellant's right to possession and mesne profits.
Jennifer Messias v. Leonard G. Lobo — (2026) INSC 502Core Argument
The Decree dated 13.04.2012 is not merely a preliminary decree; it is partly final as it conclusively determines the Appellant's right to possession and mesne profits. The Commissioner's report confirms that division by metes and bounds is impossible, making the sale provision executable without a separate final decree.
Key Precedents
- Bimal Kumar v. Shakuntala Debi (2012) 3 SCC 548 — Held that a decree may be both preliminary and final, and partly preliminary and partly final under Section 2(2) of the CPC.
- Shankar Balwant Lokhande v. Chandrakant Shankar Lokhande (1995) 3 SCC 413 — Held that a final decree merely carries into fulfilment the preliminary decree.
- Kattukandi Edathil Krishnan v. Kattukandi Edathil Valsan (2022) 16 SCC 71 — Held that there is no need to file a separate application for final decree; the trial court should proceed suo motu.
Subscribe to unlock the full argument structure — precedent mapping, bench questions, opposition rebuttals, and court-ready prayer clauses.
Already subscribed? Sign in
BENCH QUESTION
What distinguishes this case from earlier precedents on the same point?
OPPOSITION COUNTER
The ratio in this case was expressly limited to its facts by the bench itself...
Unlock the Argument Simulator
4 probable bench questions with suggested answers.
4 opposition counters with rebuttal strategies.
Available on Annual, 2-Year & 3-Year plans only.
Upgrade to Annual PlanDisclaimer: This argument framework is published by Agarawal Associates for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Adapt all submissions to the specific facts of your matter. © 2026 Agarawal Associates — apexdigest.in