Trial Court can inquire into and award profits in partition suits during final decree proceedings despite omission in preliminary decree.

The respondent No. 2 (plaintiff) filed a suit for partition and possession, resulting in a preliminary decree dated 05.09.2008, which declared her entitlement to a 1/4th share (later adjusted to 1/3rd following a death).

During final decree proceedings, the plaintiff filed an application under Order XX Rule 12 of the CPC seeking mesne profits, alleging that Defendant No. 1 was running a school ("Orchid") on the joint property and earning approximately Rs. 20,00,000 per month.

The Trial Court, via orders dated 08.01.2026 and 20.01.2026, directed Defendant No. 1 to produce income records to assess potential rental income and ordered an inquiry.

1. Whether, after passing a preliminary decree in a partition suit, a court can hold an inquiry into profits realized by a party during the pendency of the suit and award a share of those profits in the final decree, even if no such relief was sought in the plaint or granted in the preliminary decree.

The court primarily applied Order XX Rule 18 of the CPC, which governs decrees in suits for partition.

A partition suit remains pending until the final decree and the court must adjust equities, including the distribution of profits realized pending the suit.

In suits where Order XX Rule 12 applies, the court has discretionary power to order an inquiry into future mesne profits even if not specifically asked for in the plaint.

The Court reasoned that a partition suit is unique because the rights of parties are only finally adjusted at the time of the final decree.

The Court clarified that profits claimed in partition are appurtenant to the party's crystallized share rather than classic mesne profits against a trespasser.

The Court noted that the Trial Court's use of Order XX Rule 12 was essentially an exercise of its inherent powers to adjust equities under Order XX Rule 18.