AYODHI YADAV Vs. GOBIND YADAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE opposite parties No. 1 to 4 were noticed and have appeared though not present in the Court.

(2.) HEARD on the question of limitation. On the facts stated in the application, the application for condonation of delay is allowed.

(3.) THE plaintiff had instituted the suit for a permanent mandatory injunction against the defendants for restraining them from interfering with his possession and/or making any construction over the suit land. As apparent from paragraph -2 of the judgment in the Title Suit No. 24 of 1989. dated 24th May, 2004, the plaintiff -petitioner had claimed in all six decimals of land pursuant to registered agreement dated 17.10.1975 as between the plaintiff -petitioner No.1 and defendant No.1. The suit on contest was allowed in respect of the entire claim of the petitioner. A decree was, accordingly, prepared in which it got to be mentioned that the area of Schedule A land was 0.0206 hectares. On decree being so prepared, it was realised by the plaintiff -petitioner that the total area for which the suit was instituted, was six decimals but by mistake in the plaint, the area on conversion to hectares was wrongly shown as 0.0206 hectares which in fact is equivalent to five decimals only. The true conversion of six decimals into hectare would be 0.0240. Accordingly an application under Sections 152 and 153 CPC was filed before the Trial Court for correction of the area on conversion into hectares. It was submitted that the mistake was purely arithmetical and did not deal with the merits of the case. The Trial Court rejected the same on the ground that the miscellaneous case which was registered for correction was not a proceeding in the suit rather execution of decree is a proceeding in a suit. Being aggrieved by such a finding and failure to exercise the Jurisdiction, the petitioner is before this Court.