NETRANANDA DALAI Vs. RATNABATI NAYAK DEAD AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole question that arises for consideration is as to whether the decree can be corrected by the Court under Section 152 CPC, when there is no clerical or arithmetical mistake or error arising from any accidental slip or omission, but the mistake has been committed by the litigating parties.

(2.) The petitioner as plaintiff instituted Title Suit No.30 of 1992 before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Phulbani for permanent injunction impleading the predecessors -in -interest of opposite parties 1 and 2 as defendants. In the schedule of the plaint, the suit schedule property has been described as khata no.16, plot no.753, measuring an area Ac.0.20 decimal of mouza -Jiringapada. The suit was decreed. Thereafter the plaintiff levied execution case, being E.P.No.1 of 2004. The executing court refused to execute the decree since khata number was wrongly mentioned. Assailing the order of the executing court, he filed W.P.(C) No.14601 of 2005. The said petition was withdrawn so as to file an appropriate application in the executing court. This Court observed that if an application under Section 152 CPC is filed, the same shall be considered by the executing court. While the matter stood thus, he filed an application under Section 152 CPC for correction of the decree by inserting khata no.25, instead of 16. It is stated that khata number of the suit land is 25, but not 16. The executing court came to hold that wrong khata number in the plaint, judgment and decree is not due to accidental slip or arithmetical mistake and omission by the court. It will not be appropriate to allow the amendment of khata number in the decree alone without amending the khata number in the plaint and judgment. Held so, the learned trial court rejected the application.

(3.) Assailing the said order, Mr.Pattnaik, learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the learned trial court committed an error in not allowing the application for correction of decree. He further submitted that the Court has inherent power to amend the decree even if mistake has been committed by the parties. He relied on the decisions of different High Courts in the case of Appat Krishna Poduval Vrs. Lakshmi Nathiar and others, AIR 1950 Madras 751, Shankergouda Vrs. Garangouda and others, AIR 1976 Karnataka 204, Rayappa Basappa Killed Vrs. The Land Tribunal and others, AIR 1976 Karnataka 205, Mohinder Singh and others Vrs. Teja Singh and others, AIR 1979 Punjab and Haryana 47 and Santosh Kumar Sahoo Vrs. Radhanath Sahoo and four others, 2013(I) OLR -363.