Court's inherent power under Section 152 of CPC allows correction of clerical mistakes in judgments, ensuring parties are not prejudiced by accidental errors.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri C.B. Adarsh Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record.

2. The plaintiff-respondent filed OS No.482 of 2017 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada for eviction of the defendants (2 in number) in the suit from the suit schedule property and for recovery of arrears of rent and damages from 06.05.2017 till the date of delivery. The suit was decreed on 10.09.2018. The appellant (defendant No.1 in the suit) filed AS No.219 of 2019. The appeal was dismissed by the Court of learned VI Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Vijayawada.

3. The Appellate Court passed the following decree.

“(i) that the appeal is be and hereby dismissed.

(ii) that the decree and judgment passed by the Trial Court in OS No.482 of 2017 dated 10.09.2018 is be and hereby confirmed.

(iii) that the appellant and 2nd respondent are be and hereby directed to vacate and deliver vacant possession of suit schedule property to the 1st respondent/plaintiff within two months failing which the 1st respondent/plaintiff is at liberty to take the delivery by following procedure contemplated under law.

(iv) that the appellant and 2nd respondent are be and hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,44,000/- to the 1st respondent/plaintiff being the arrears of rent and a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month towards damages from 06.05.2017 till the date of delivery.

(v) that IA No.47 of 2024 filed under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC is be and hereby simultaneously disposed of dismissing the petition.

(vi) that the appellant do pay to the respondent a sum of Rs.23,254/- (Rupees Twenty three thousand two hundred and fifty four only) towards costs do bear their own costs of Rs.-Nil- (Bill of costs not filed).

Note : Amended as per orders in IA No.77 of 2024 dated 06.12.2024.

Given under my hand and seal of this Court, on this the 28th day of August, 2024.”

4. There appeared a mistake in the decree in clause (6) in first line, the ‘respondents’ was mentioned in place of ‘appellant’ and in the same line the ‘appellant’ was mentioned instead of ‘respondents’.

5. The plaintiff-respondent filed IA No.77 of 2024 under Section 152 of CPC for correction in decree.

6. IA No.77 of 2024 was allowed, making the correction in clause (6) of the appellate decree, correcting the ‘appellant’ for the ‘respondents’ and ‘respondents’ for the ‘appellant’ at the respective places.

7. Challenging the said order, the civil revision petition has been filed.

8. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that by such correction now the present appellant has been directed to pay the costs. The liability has been passed on the petitioner. He submits that such mistake is not ‘clerical’ or ‘arithmetical’ mistake and therefore could not be corrected under Section 152 CPC.

9. I have considered the aforesaid submission and perused the material on record.

10. Section 152 of CPC reads as under :

“152. Amendment of judgments, decrees or orders.-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.”

11. Section 152 CPC clearly provides that clerical or arithmetical mistakes in judgments, decrees or orders or even 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 or any of the parties.

12. In Samarendra Nath Sinha v. Krishna Kumar Nag , 1966 SCC Online SC 29 , the Hon’