The main legal point established is that a decree cannot be modified by the Court that passed it unless there are clerical or accidental mistakes. Additionally, the Court emphasized the need for detailed orders when granting police protection to prevent misuse and disturbance of the status quo.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair order and decreetal order dated 19.07.2019 made in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.S.No.1154 of 2017 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Tiruchirapalli.)

The civil revision petition has been filed against the order passed by the Principal District Munsif, Tiruchirapalli in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.S.No.1154 of 2017, dated 19.07.2019.

2. The petitioner herein is the petitioner/defendant and the respondent herein is the respondent/plaintiff before the Court below.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred as per the litigative status before the Court below.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent/plaintiff herein has filed a suit for the relief of permanent injunction restraining this petitioner/defendant from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondent/plaintiff has given a false address of the petitioner/defendant and obtained an ex parte decree on 03.07.2018. Against the ex parte decree, he filed an application to set aside the ex parte decree. After the ex parte decree, the respondent/plaintiff has moved an application for the relief of police protection directing the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Law and Order, Srirangam, Trichy, to give police protection.

5. It appears from the record, even in the application filed for police protection, an ex parte order was passed as the postal cover sent to the petitioner/defendant was returned as no residence. The order passed by the Court below is follows:

"Respondent called absent respondent set ex parte.

Petition is allowed.

Issued notice to the concerned police station file batta."

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the very order passed by the Court below is cryptic in nature and that after passing a decree, if at all the petitioner has got any grievance, he has to file an execution petition. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the following judgments:

(i) Narpat Singh Vs Rajasthan Financial Corporation reported in 2008 (1) CTC 73. The relevant portion of the order is extracted hereunder:

"2. I.A.Nos.15-16 for clarification and direction of Court''s Order dated 3.5.2007 are totally misconceived. Moreover, ordinarily nos. I.A. lies after a case is finally disposed of. Ordinarily, an I.A. is maintainable only in a pending case. Once a case is finally disposed of the Court becomes functus officio, and thereafter an I.A. lies ordinarily only for correcting clerical or accidental mistakes. The same are accordingly, dismissed."

(ii) Surya Pelle Chemical & Mould Vs Hi-Lite Leathers reported in 2019-3-L.W.970. The relevant portion of the order is extracted hereunder:

"13. Similarly in the Judgement reported in CDJ 2008 SC 775 – Bholi (Dead) by Lrs Vs. Lachhman Singh and others, the Honourable Supreme Court had observed that in an earlier round of litigation between the parties which went up to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court had held as follows:

“An application was filed under Section 147 CPC for extension of time to deposit the second instalment which was rejected by the trial Court. Aggrieved thereby, the defendants filed an application under Section 115 CPC which was allowed by the High Court by extending the time enabling the defendants to deposit the second instalment. Against the order of the High Court the plaintiff filed C.A.No.3422 of 1996 before this Court which was disposed of on 30th October, 2002. The relevant portion of the order reads under:

It is not disputed that the settlement arrived at between the parties was made part of the decree of the Court. It was a decree like any other decree passed by the Civil Cour