CPC - Litigating Hand

A. Shyamal Bihari Mishra and Ors. vs Girish Narain Missir and Anr. AIR 1962 Pat 116

It is a cardinal principle of the law of procedure that the decree should agree with the judgment. Where, therefore, its decree is at variance with its judgment, and, when the decree does not correctly express what was really decided and intended by the Court, it has an inherent power to vary or amend its own decree or order so as to carry out its own meaning and intention. Law provides for no limitation for an application to amend the decree under section 152 of the CPC

16. As the decision of the sole question raised in the appeal rests on the interpretation of Section 152 of the Code, it would be useful at this very stage, to read it. Section 152 of the Code is to the following effect:

152. Clerical or arithmetical mistakes in judgments, decrees or orders or errors arising therein from any accidental slip or omission may at any time be corrected by the Court either of its own motion or on the application of any of the parties.”

17. It is a cardinal principle of the law of procedure that the decree should agree with the judgment. Where, therefore, its decree is at variance with its judgment, and, when the decree does not correctly express what was really decided and intended by the Court, it has an inherent power to vary or amend its own decree or order so as to carry out its own meaning and intention. In doing so, it does nothing but exercise a power to correct a mistake of its ministerial officer by whom the decree or order was drawn up. It only insists that the decree drawn up in the office of the Court should correctly express the judgment given by the Court. In the words of Lindley, L. J. in re Swire; Mellor v. Swire (1885) 3 Ch. D. 239 at page 246:

“there is no such magic in passing and entering an order as to deprive the court of jurisdiction to make its own records true, and if an order as passed and entered does not express the real order of the Court, it would, as it appears to me be shocking to say that the party aggrieved cannot come here to have the record set right but must go to the House of Lords by way of appeal.”

18. Every Court,  therefore,  has  an  inherent power   over  its   own   records,   so   long as   those records   are  within   its      powers,   and   it can   set right any mistake in them.

19. In Hatton v. Haris, (1892) AC 547, at page 560, Lord Watson said:

“When an error of that kind has been committed, it is always within the competency of the Court, if nothing has intervened, which would render it inexpedient or inequitable to do so, to correct the record in order to bring it into harmony with the order which the Judge obviously meant to pronounce.”

20. Where, however, the decree or order as drawn up represents the real decision of the Court, it has no jurisdiction to re-hear or alter it.

21. There are, however, only two cases in which the Court can amend or vary a decree or order after it is drawn up and signed, namely, (1) under its inherent power when the decree or order does not correctly state what the Court actuality decided and intended; and,  (2) Under Section 152, where there has been a clerical or arithmetical mistake, or an error arising from an accidental slip or omission.  

22. Under Sections 151 and 152 of the Code very wide powers have been given to the Court. Section 151 lays down that nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect the inherent power of the Court to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court. Under the present Code, an application to amend a decree so as to bring it in conformity with the judgment must now be made to the Court in the exercise of its inherent powers under Section 151 of the Code, Under Order 20, Rule 7 of the Code, it is the duty of the Judge to satisfy himself that the decree is in conformity with the judgment. This duty primarily rests with the Court, and, not with any interested party, and therefore, the Court can do so even suo motu, or, on an application by any interested party, and, such an application to amend a decree to make it in conformity with the judgment may be made and entertained by the Court at any time

23. Section 152 however, permits clerical, or arithmetical mistakes in judgments decrees or orders to be corrected at any time. Section 152, therefore, deals with one of the two cases, stated above, in which only the Court can amend or vary a decree or order after it is drawn up and signed. Under this section, where there has been a clerical or arithemetical mistake, or an error arising from an accidental slip or omission in a judgment, decree or order, it may, at any time, be corrected by the Court either on its own motion or on the application of any of the parties. The amendment petition under Section 152 of the Code is not a continuation of the suit or proceedings therein. It is in the nature of an independent proceeding, though connected with the order of which the amendment is sought. The jurisdiction of the Court to amend its decree or order on the ground that by inadvertence, because of any clerical mistake, the decree or order as drawn up does not give effect to the intention of the Court as expressed in its judgment is undoubted. In order that the manifest rights of a party, which were intended to be effected by its decision may not be defeated, the Court always exercises its right to amend its decree or order, if as drawn up, it is not in conformity with its judgment clue to a clerical or arithmetical mistake in it.

24. It is therefore, manifest from Section 153 of the Code, that the Slip Rule, as sometimes it is called, will enable the Court to rectify the slip and amend its decree or order, which has been drawn up, only (a) where there has been an accidental slip or omission in the decree or order as drawn up, or, (b) when the order as drawn up does not correctly state what the Court actually decided and intended.

25. It is a general principle that rules of limitation are applicable to acts to be performed by litigants and not to acts which the Court may or has to perform suo motu. An amendment under Section 152 falls within the latter class of acts and there is, consequently, no limitation for an application for amendment under this section. The amendment can be made at any time. The phrase “at any time”, used in Section 152, indicates that the power of the Court to amend its decree under this section is uncontrolled by any time factor, but only by the scope of the section within which it functions. There is, therefore, no limitation for an application to amend the decree. The decree may be amended under this section at any time, although the time for appealing from the decree has expired.