SARASWATI Vs. CHUNI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DESPITE time having been granted to the respondents they have not filed any objections. In the circumstances, I assume that they are not inclined to oppose this application. Otherwise, also it must succeed.

(2.) THE dispute in the present case related to the land covered by the gift deed dated 16th of Magh, 2010 (bk) executed by one Mst. Roma in favour of Chuni Lal. The plaintiffs case was that the gift deed was void, illegal, and in -operative, He asked for possession of the land by way of consequential relief. The amended plaint described the disputed land to be comprising of several survey Nos including survey Nos 2642 and 1201 situated in village Chak, Tehsil Badarwah. The decree sheet finally prepared in this court has mis -described the disputed land as including survey No, 2142 in place of survey No. 2642 and survey No 2102 in place of survey No. 1202. This is clearly an accidental mistake inasmuch as the land described in the gift deed, which was impugned, as also in the amended plaint on which the judgment was based on survey Nos. 2642 and 1202 and not survey Nos. 2142 and 2102 as mentioned in the decree sheet. The mistake is apparent and manifestly accidental. There can be hardly any difficulty in rectifying the same in as much as the court has ample power under Section 152 C.P.C. to rectify such mistakes.

(3.) SO far as survey Nos. 337 situate in village Chak is concerned, the decree follows the description in the amended plaint. But the description in the amended plaint appears to have been occasioned by an accidental is take on the part of the Patwari who inadvertantly described Survey No 337 in place of survey No 737 as part of the disputed kind in the extracts issued by him. The mistake can be rectified only if it can be found shat the parties were really litigating in respect of survey No. 737 although it was incorrectly mentioned as survey No. 337 in the plaint That they were so litigating, is clear from the gilt deed to which the suit related. The gift deed shows that the gift property included survey No, 737 and not survey No. 337 as described in the plaint. I am therefore inclined to hold that although survey No. 737 was mis -described as survey No. 337 in the amended plaint, the parties knew the dispute actually related to survey No. 737 and in fact carried on the litigation on that footing. If that be so, there can be no difficulty in rectifying the mistake under Section 152 C.P.C which succeeds and is allowed, It is directed that the decree sheet shall be so amended that survey Nos 21422102, add 337 are substituted by Survey Nos. 2642,1201, and 737 respectively. The application shall be consigned to the records.