SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(SC) 726

2005(3) Supreme 586
Supreme Court of India
(From Patna High Court)
B.P. Singh & Arun Kumar, JJ.
Bijay Kumar Saraogi —Appellant
versus
State of Jharkhand —Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 848 of 1999
Decided on 26-4-2005
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : T.N. Singh, V.K. Singh and P.K. Srivastava, Advocates.
For the Respondent : Ashok Kumar, Advocate.

Important point
Section 152 CPC cannot be invoked for claiming a substantive relief which was not granted under the decree or a pretext to get the order which had attained finality reviewed.­

Headnote:Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Section 152Land Acquisition Act, 1894—Lands belonging to appellant were acquired and Collector made the award—While reference under Section 18 of the Act was pending Act came to be amended and came into force from 24.9.1984—Reference Court made award on 10.2.1983 which was not questioned any further by claimant—Application by appellant-claimant filed in 1995 under Section 152 CPC claiming entitlement to benefit under Sections 23(2) and 28 of Amendment Act—Civil Court dismissed application as not maintainable and High Court affirmed said finding—Appeal—Section 152 CPC could not be invoked for claiming a substantive relief which was not granted under the decree. (Para 3)

       

Judgment

B.P. Singh, J.—We have heard counsel for the parties.

2. The facts not in dispute are that lands belonging to the appellant were acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The collector made his Award against which the appellant preferred a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and the same was pending when the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill was introduced in the Parliament on 30th April, 1982 and the Amendment Act came into force from 24th September, 1984. In between these two dates Reference Court made its Award on February 10, 1983. After the Award the appellant received the amount awarded to him and did not prefer a further appeal therefrom.

In the year 1995 the appellant filed an application under Section 152 C.P.C. before the Special Sub-Judge, Ranchi claiming that he was entitled to the benefit conferred by Sections 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act as amended by the Amendment Act. The learned Sub-Judge held that the said application was not maintainable and the said finding has been affirmed by the High Court.

3. We find no reason to interfere with the order of the High Court because a mere perusal of Section 152 makes it clear that Section 152 C.P.C. can be invoked for the limited purpose of correcting clerical errors or arithmetical mistakes in the judgment. The Section cannot be invoked for claiming a substantive relief which was not granted under the decree, or as a pretext to get the order which has attained finality reviewed. If any authority is required for this proposition, one may refer to the decision of this Court in State of Punjab Vs. Darshan Singh 2004(1) SCC 328.

4. The appeal, therefore, lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.

No costs.

Appeal dismissed.

***************

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top