JUDGMENT

Tek Chand, J. - This is a petition for revision of the order of the District Judge. Karnal, ordering under Section 152, Civil P.C., amendment of a decree passed by his predecessor two years before.

2. The relevant facts are that Khuda Bakhsh and Tulli mortgaged a house to one Ulfat Ram. Ulfat Ram died childless and was succeeded by his reversioners Relu Mal, etc. (petitioners). In the meantime the mortgagors had sold the equity of redemption to Maru Mal, respondent, and had authorized him to redeem the mortgage from Ulfat Ram's heirs. Nothing having been paid to the mortgagees, Relu Mal, etc., instituted a suit for recovery of the amount due to them on foot of the mortgage praying that the amount found due to them be realized by sale of the mortgaged property. No prayer for a personal decree against the purchasers of the equity of redemption was made. The trial Court passed a decree for Rs. 308 with proportionate costs in favour of Relu Mal, etc., against the then defendants, Maru Mal etc.,

with the reservation that the decretal amount should be realized by the sale of the house mortgaged.

3. Maru Mal, etc., preferred an appeal to the District Judge (Mr. Skemp) praying for reduction of the amount found payable by the trial Court. The District Judge went though the accounts and reduced the amount to Rs. 274-8-0, but in the judgment he omitted to mention that the amount was recoverable only by sale of the mortgaged property. The concluding portion of his judgment runs as follows:

The decree of this Court is to state that the mortgagees, Relu Mal, Shugan Chand, Ratan Lal, plaintiffs, and Jar Lal, defendant, are entitled to realize the sum of Rs. 274-8-0 from Maru Mal defendant.

4. A decree was prepared in accordance with this judgment. No second appeal was preferred by either party. Two years later Maru Mal, etc., applied to the "District Judge (Mr. Sri Ram) to amend the judgment and the decree by adding the words at the end "by sale of the house mortgaged," so that it might be made clear that the amount is not recoverable from the judgment-debtors personally but should only be realized by sale of the property mortgaged. This application was granted by the District Judge and he directed that the words mentioned above be added to the decree.

5. Mr. Shamair Chand, who appears on behalf of the decree-holder Relu Mal contends that the learned District Judge has added these words to the decree but not in the judgment, and therefore the decree is not in accordance with the judgment. This is correct, but there is no doubt that it was due to a mere oversight on the part of the District Judge (Mr. Sri Ram). I accordingly direct that the words "by sale of the house mortgaged" be added to the judgment also.

6. Mr. Shamai Chand's, main argument, however, is that the learned District Judge was not justified in adding these words either in the judgment or in the decree under Section 152 and that such an amendment could only be made either on second appeal to this Court or on a properly constituted application for review filed before the District Judge. There is, however, no force in this contention. Section 152 authorizes a Court to correct not only clerical or arithmetical mistakes in judgments, decrees, or orders, but also errors arising therein from accidental slips or omissions. After going through the judgment of Mr. Skemp I have no doubt whatsoever that these words were omitted by an accidental slip and the judgment and decree passed by him could be amended under Section 152, Civil P.C.

7. I therefore see no force in this re' vision and dismiss it with the modification that the words "by sale of the house mortgaged "be added to the judgment of Mr. Skemp dated 8th January 1924. Having regard to all the circumstances of the case I leave the parties to bear their own costs in both Courts.