The liability of partners in a firm extends to acts of the firm, and a decree in favor of or against a firm has the same effect as a decree in favor of or against the partners.

R. Sudhakar,J.

1. This application is filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of the Original Side Rules read with Order XVIII Rule 1 and Order XIV Rule 12 of the Original Side Rules to set aside the order dated 15.7.2013, as modified on 1.8.2013, in A.No.2555 of 2013 in E.P.No.226 of 2012 in C.S.No.578 of 2011 passed by the learned Master.

2.1. The facts in a nutshell are as follows: The first defendant/applicant herein is a judgment-debtor. On 15.11.2011, a decree was passed on admission in favour of the plaintiff/respondent herein (decree-holder). In execution of the said decree as against the first defendant/applicant firm and its partners, the plaintiff/respondent herein (decree-holder), filed E.P.No.226 of 2012 seeking an order of attachment of the bank account and a prohibitory order was passed by the learned Master on 15.11.2012 attaching the bank account of the first defendant/applicant firm (judgment-debtor).

2.2. On 19.4.2013, plaintiff/respondent herein (decree-holder) filed A.No.2555 of 2013 in E.P.No.226 of 2012 under Order XXI Rule 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the same was served on the counsel for the applicant herein (judgment-debtor) seeking disclosure of assets of the applicant firm and its partners. The application was listed on 24.6.2013 and the applicant herein (judgment-debtor) sought time to file counter and the matter was adjourned to 8.7.2013. On 8.7.2013, the applicant herein (judgment-debtor) sought further time to file counter and the matter was adjourned to 15.7.2013, as a last chance. On 15.7.2013, the learned Master, while declining to grant the applicant herein (judgment debtor) further time, passed the following order:

"Posted today for filing an affidavit (J/D) or not filed sufficient opportunity given to the 1st respondent/Judgment Debtor to file counter. This petition is filed to make an affidavit stating the particular of the assets of Judgment Debtor (Respondent). Since the sufficient opportunity is given to Judgment Debtor (Respondent) and counter is not filed. It is necessary to pass appropriate order at this stage. Hence the Judgment Debtor (Respondent) is directed to make an affidavit stating the particular of the assets of the Judgment Debtor (Respondent) within 15 days from today. With above observation petition is closed."

2.3. However, when the copy of the order was received, the respondent herein (decreeholder) noticed that the order passed by the learned Master is not in terms of the prayer made in A.No.2555 of 2013 and, therefore, the matter was listed on 29.7.2013 at the request of the respondent herein (decree-holder) pointing out the omission in the order dated 15.7.2013. The matter was listed before the learned Master on 30.7.2013 under the caption "for clarification" showing the names of the counsel on either side and the matter was adjourned to 1.8.2013. The learned Master, after hearing the respondent herein (decree-holder) and the objections of the applicant herein (judgment-debtor), directed the applicant firm and its partners to make an affidavit stating the particulars of the assets of the judgment-debtor and its partners. The said order reads as under:

"After passing orders in A.2555/2013 on 15.7.2013, representation was made on behalf of the petitioners, stating that the prayer is to direct the judgment debtor and its partners to make an affidavit stating the particulars of assets, whereas on 15.7.2013 order, judgment debtor alone is directed to furnish affidavit stating the particulars of assets, hence to amend the order to that effect. Counsel for the respondent argued that the decree is against Firm and not against partners, so partners may not be directed to furnish the affidavit of particulars of assets.

If the pointed out matter is clerical or arithmetical mistake the court on its own motion may amend the decree or judgment and errors arising there in from any accidental slip or omission can also be corrected. The matter pointed out is only omission.