1. This is a petition seeking amendment of the decree.

2. The suit is filed by the plaintiff for specific performance of an agreement for sale dated 21.9.1977 and also for damages. The plaint schedule consists of two items of properties. Item No.1 is a theatre by name 'Sangam Theatre' with land, building, furniture and equipments etc. and item No. 2 is Pushpa Theatre with land, building, furniture and equipments etc. When there was an agreement for sale and there was a failure to perform the terms thereon. The plaintiff instituted the suit for specific performance. The suit was decreed in part directing the plaintiff to hand over possession of the properties on receiving an amount of Rs. 2,07,434.67. But in the judgment it is specifically stated in Para.41 as follows:

"On paying this amount of Rs. 2,07,434.67 the plaintiff shall vacate and hand over possession. The accounts are settled accordingly".

It was also observed at page 42 of the trial court judgment as follows:

"In view of the finding on issue No. 2 to 4, the plaintiff is not entitled for any specific performance. On paying Rs. 2,07,434.67 the plaintiff shall vacate and hand over possession".

3. But when the decree was drawn up, the decree reads as follows:

"That the defendant No. 3 do pay a sum of Rs. 2,07,434.67 to the plaintiff and vacate and hand over possession of the properties".

4. Thus, the amount has to be paid by the defendant whereupon the plaintiff has to vacate and hand over possession of the properties to the defendant which is clear from the judgment as is referred to above. Therefore, there is an omission of the word 'who shall vacate' after the word 'plaintiff' in the decree to indicate that, the plaintiff is to vacate the premises on receipt of the amount. Hence praying that the decree be amended, the above petition is filed.

5. Against the judgment and decree of the court below an appeal was preferred before this Court as A.S. 167 of 1990 and thereafter a further appeal as A.F.A. 99 of 1994 before a Division Bench of this Court against the judgment of the learned Single Judge. A.F.A. 99/1994 along with A.F.A. 100/1994 and 101 of 1994 and A.S. 422 of 1996 was disposed of by a common judgment. The opinion among the two judges who heard the matter was divided, one of whom dismissing the appeal A.S. 422 of 1996 and partly allowing A.F.A. Nos. 99,100 and 101 of 1994 and the other allowing A.S. 422 of 1996 and dismissing A.F.A. Nos. 99,100 and 101 of 1994. However, since there was no divergence on point of law but the difference was only on question of fact, applying the principles contained in S.98 of the Code of Civil Procedure the decree appealed against stood confirmed as per the order of the court dated 19th January, 2001. According to the petitioner, the judgment and decree of the Sub Court, Kozhikode having merged with the judgment and decree of this Court, he filed this petition for necessary relief to amend the decree supplying the omission as follows:

"1. In the prayer portion of the Decree the word 'plaintiff shall' may be inserted after 'and' before 'vacate' in between line No. 3 and 4.

2. After the sentence that "the parties do bear their respective cost" and before Item No.1 at Page No. 3 the following may be included:

Schedule

Item No.1

All that piece or parcel of land or ground situate lying and being in Nagaram Amsom, Kozhikode Taluk, Calicut City bearing Ward No. 16, Block No. 14, T. Survey No. 191/2, Puthukudi paramba, at Railway Station Road, Calicut with the super structure of cinema house built, constructed or standing thereon known as "Sangam Theatre" fully equipped with 70 MM Screen, two R.C. Gevestor double Projectors, 70/35 MM slide projector, two Blue Star Air conditioners, Generators, Motors Fans and Auditorium with 1200 seats fully furnished with furnitures, fixtures, fittings and other paraphernalia and appurtenances of the cinema house with outside compound wall and gates".

6. The first respondent in the above petition filed a