2007 (10) TMI 616 - SC - Indian Laws

Whether there exists any difficulty in executing the decree or not? Whether as only because the JL numbers in the schedule was missing the same by itself would not be a ground to interfere with the impugned order?

Issues Involved:
1. Amendment of the plaint and decree.
2. Misdescription of the suit property.
3. Power of the court under Section 152 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).
4. Impact of non-impleadment of necessary parties.
5. Application for impleadment by third parties.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Amendment of the plaint and decree:
The respondent filed a suit for declaration, possession, and damages, resulting in an ex-parte decree in favor of the plaintiff. The plaintiff later sought to amend the plaint and decree to correct the description of the suit property, citing inadvertent errors. The proposed amendments included inserting specific plot and Khatian numbers into the property schedule. The appellant objected, arguing that such amendments would effectively substitute one property for another, which is impermissible under the law. However, the court rejected the appellant's objections and upheld the amendments, emphasizing that the amendments were to correct accidental errors and would not cause prejudice to the defendant.

2. Misdescription of the suit property:
The plaintiff claimed title over the suit property based on registered deeds of conveyance. However, the property description in the plaint and the subsequent decree contained errors, including missing plot and Khatian numbers. The plaintiff argued that these were clerical mistakes and sought to amend the plaint and decree to accurately reflect the property details. The court found that the errors were indeed accidental and allowed the amendments to ensure the decree accurately reflected the intention of the court and the parties.

3. Power of the court under Section 152 and Section 151 of the CPC:
Section 152 of the CPC allows courts to correct clerical or arithmetical mistakes in judgments, decrees, or orders arising from accidental slips or omissions. The court held that this provision should not be construed narrowly and can be used to correct mistakes made by the parties themselves if they are accidental. The court also recognized its inherent power under Section 151 of the CPC to ensure that records are accurate and reflect the true state of affairs. The court cited several precedents, including *Samarendra Nath Sinha v. Krishna Kumar Nag* and *Bela Debi v. Bon Behary Roy*, to support its decision to allow the amendments.

4. Impact of non-impleadment of necessary parties:
The appellant argued that the decree was obtained ex parte and that the sisters of defendant No.1, who were co-owners of the property, were not impleaded in the suit. The court noted that the appellant did not file a written statement or appeal against the original decree and examined himself as a witness, indicating awareness of the issues. The court held that the non-impleadment of the sisters did not prejudice the appellant and did not warrant setting aside the decree or denying the amendments.

5. Application for impleadment by third parties:
An application for impleadment was filed by a third party, claiming possession and interest in the suit property and alleging prejudice due to the impugned order. The court dismissed the application, stating that the applicants were not parties to the original suit and thus not bound by the decree. The court noted that the applicants could seek remedies under Order 21 Rules 97 and 99 of the CPC if necessary. The court emphasized that the executing court should consider any difficulties in executing the decree during the execution process.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court upheld the amendments to the plaint and decree, recognizing the court's power to correct accidental errors under Sections 152 and 151 of the CPC. The court dismissed the appeal and the application for impleadment, allowing the decree to be executed with the corrected property description. The court emphasized the importance of ensuring that judicial records accurately reflect the true state of affairs and the intention of the court and parties.

← Previous Next →