DILIP DUTTA Vs. AJAY KUMAR PAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE judgment debtors have assailed the Order No.61 dated June 18, 2012 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division) 1st Court, Arambagh in Title Execution Case No. 4 of 2005 allowing an application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure by permitting the decree holder to amend the schedule of the plaint.

(2.) THE point agitated by the judgment debtors/petitioners in this revisional application relates to the pure question of law and as such, there is no necessity of recording the facts in ex tenso. However, the brief facts are narrated below which are more or less admitted.

(3.) THE judgment debtors/petitioners are not assailing the order, by which, such amendment is allowed to be carried out in the plaint as well as the decree on merit, but is assailed on the pure question of law that after the dismissal of an appeal, the decree of the Trial Court merged with the decree of the Appellate Court and, therefore, any amendment and/or correction sought to be made in the decree can only be done by an Appellate Court and not by an Executing Court being the Court of first instance.