Karnataka High Court
Smt. Kamalavva W/O Shankrappa ... vs Veerabhadrappa S/O Sangappa ... on 9 January, 2014
Author: N.Kumar
Bench: N.Kumar
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 67759/2010 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
Smt. Kamalavva
W/o Shakrappa Piddanavar,
Age : 45 years, Occ: Agriculture,
R/o Konnur, Tq. Nargunda,
Dist. Gadag.
... PETITIONER
(BY Sri Shrikant T Patil, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Veerabhadrappa
S/o Sangappa Shirahatti,
Age : 50 years,
Occ: Agriculture,
R/o Konnur, Tq.Nargunda,
Dist. Gadag.
... RESPONDENT
(BY Sri R.K.Hatti, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER DATED 23.1.2010 IN O.S.No. 184/2006 ON THE FILE OF
CIVIL JUDGE (SR. DN.), GADAG, (ANNEXURE-E) AND ORDER
DATED 24.9.2010 IN MISC. PETITION NO.8/2010 ON THE FILE
OF ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.), GADAG, (ANNEXURE-H).
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS
DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
:2:
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the trial Court dismissing the application of the plaintiff for correction of the father's name of the defendant in the plaint and correspondingly in all other proceedings.
2. The suit is filed seeking specific performance of the agreement of sale. Defendant in the plaint is described as "Veerabhadrappa S/o Nagappa Shirahatti". In fact, in the affidavit filed verifying the averments in plaint, in the cause title the name of defendant is described as "Veerabhadrappa vÀAzÉ Sangappa Shirahatti". Subsequently, the suit came to be decreed. It has attained finality. Before putting decree into execution, the plaintiff realised the mistake which has crept in the cause title of the plaint. Therefore, she filed an application under Sections 152 and 153 of CPC for correction of the father's name of the defendant. The said application came to be dismissed by the trial Court on the ground that the said provision apply to correct the mistakes committed by the Court and not by the party. Against the said order she filed one more application which is styled as Miscellaneous Petition. It also came to be dismissed. Against the said orders, the petitioner is before this Court. :3:
3. Learned counsel for the respondent objecting to the said amendment contended that it would substantially alter the judgment and decree.
4. The agreement of sale is executed by the defendant. Defendant was served with the suit summons. He entered appearance through his counsel. He did not raise any objection regarding incorrect description in the plaint. On the contrary, he remained absent. It is after decree, when these applications are filed, notice is ordered, he is pleading substantial inconvenience. Though the defendant admits that his father's name is Sangappa and the plaintiff has wrongly described as Nagappa, it is a typographical error. Whether a typographical error is committed by a Court or a party, the party cannot be made to suffer. That is why precisely Sections 151, 152 and 153 are incorporated to make any corrections of the unintended mistakes in the pleadings. In fact this Court had an occasion to consider a similar situation in the case of SHANKERGOUDA vs GARANGOUDA AND OTHERS [1976 (1) Kar.L.J. 340] where it was held that, the Court has power under Section 152 to amend its judgment and decree so as to correct a clerical or inadvertent error, although such error had :4: occurred on account of a mistake of the parties themselves in the pleadings.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent relied on two judgments of the Apex Court in STATE OF PUNJAB vs DARSHAN SINGH [AIR 2003 SC 4179] and BIJAY KUMAR SARAOGI vs STATE OF JHARKHAND [2005 ACJ 1461] where it has been held that, where the mistake pointed out is not a clerical or arithmetical error or occurring from accidental slip or omission but a substantial relief is claimed, such amendments are not permissible.
6. As is clear from the aforesaid judgments, all clerical, arithmetical mistakes or errors arising from accidental slip or omission are liable to be corrected under the said provision. Therefore, the said judgment is an authority for the proposition that the Court is duty bound to correct the clerical and arithmetical errors in judgments and decrees and in the pleadings of the parties also, as neither the mistake committed by the Court nor the lawyer who is an officer of the Court can seriously affect the right of a party.
:5:
7. In that view of the matter, the trial Court committed an error in being too technical and dismissing the application. Procedural law is hand made of justice. After a party has succeeded in a suit, he cannot be deprived of the fruits of the decree on this technical ground. Therefore, the order passed by the trial Court requires to be set aside. Accordingly, it is set aside. Hence, I pass the following order : -
(a) Writ Petition is allowed.
(b) The impugned order is quashed.
(c) Application for correction is allowed.
(d) The trial Court is directed to carry out the amendment.
SD/-
JUDGE CKL