The main legal point established in the judgment is that the doctrine of merger applies, and once an appellate court has passed a decision, the judgment of the trial court will merge in the judgment of the appellate court, ceasing to have jurisdiction to amend its own judgment, decree, or proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

Dev Darshan Sud, J.

This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution has been preferred by the petitioner, who was the plaintiff before the learned trial Court, against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 1, Mandi dismissing her application under Sections 151 and 152 of the CPC (hereinafter referred to as CPC) for correction of purported error in the decree. It is undisputed before me that the plaintiff instituted a Civil Suit No. 140 of 1999 which was decreed on 28.9.2001 in favour of the petitioner. It is also not disputed that appeal preferred against this decree by the respondents/defendants was dismissed after contest. RSA No. 491 of 2003 was preferred by the defendants against this judgment and decree of the learned two Courts below which appeal was dismissed in limine on 5th January, 2004.

2. The learned trial Court did not consider the application u/s 152 of the CPC on merits but disposed of the application holding that it was not maintainable since the mandate of Section 153A is that on the basis of doctrine of merger the decree can be amended by the Appellate Court only since it has been contested on merits in the appeal before that Court. In Gojer Bros. (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Shri Ratan Lal Singh, AIR 1974 SC 1380 the Court holds:

11. The juristic justification of the doctrine of merger may be sought in the principle that there cannot be, at one and the same time, more than one operative order governing the same subject-matter. Therefore the judgment of an inferior Court, if subjected to an examination by the superior Court, ceases to have existence in the eye of law and is treated as being superseded by the judgment of the superior Court. In other words, the judgment of the inferior Court losses its identity by its merger with the judgment of the superior Court.

19. The fundamental reason of the rule that where there has been an appeal, the decree to be executed is the decree of the appellate Court is that in such cases the decree of the trial Court is merged in the decree of the appellate Court. In course of time, this concept which was originally restricted to appellate decrees on the ground that an appeal is a continuation of the suit, came to be gradually extended to other proceedings like revisions and even to proceedings before quasi-judicial and executive authorities.

3. In Maldar Mahaboob Sab and Others Vs. Allabaksh, AIR 2004 AP 193, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh holds:

10. Section 153A of the CPC had been introduced by the Amendment Act 1976. This was introduced to resolve the difference of opinion amongst different High Courts as to which of the Courts can amend the decree u/s 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It appears that the view taken by the Calcutta, Madras, Allahabad and Rangoon High Courts was that it is the first appellate Court alone that can amend the decree whereas the Bombay and Patna High Courts took the view that it is the Court of first instance along can amend the decree.

11. In this background, it is necessary to refer to some of the judgments, which have been decided by different High Courts, subsequent to the introduction of Section 153 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

12. A full Bench of the Kerala High Court in Kannan and Others Vs. Narayani and Others, AIR 1980 Ker 76 referred to various judgments of the High Courts, including that a Privy Council. In 14 CWN 667 (Privy Council) the Privy Council held that alteration of a decree by the Court, which passed it, if that had been affirmed in appeal, was without jurisdiction.

13. It was further noticed by the Full Bench of the Kerala High Court that the principle laid down in Brij Narain's case (supra) was already taken note of an approved by the Supreme Court in Gojer Bros. (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Shri Ratan Lal Singh, AIR 1974 SC 1380 The principle laid down by the Supreme Court in the above said case also necessary to re-extract for ready reference, which is as under:

An application of this very principl