Bombay High Court Rejects Application for Amendment of Decree under Section 152 of CPC Court rules that trial court lacks jurisdiction to amend a decree confirmed by the appellate court.

Case Note & Summary

The Bombay High Court rejected an application filed by original defendant Nos. 4, 9, and 10 under Section 152 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) seeking to amend a preliminary decree passed in 2003 by the Trial Court in a partition suit. The applicants claimed that a sale deed executed by one of the defendants entitled them to an increased share in the property. The Court ruled that the Trial Court lacked jurisdiction to amend a decree confirmed by the appellate courts and found no merit in the applicants' claims.

The Bombay High Court ruled on an application filed under Section 152 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) seeking an amendment to a preliminary decree in a partition suit. The applicants, original defendant Nos. 4, 9, and 10, requested an increased share in the property based on a prior sale deed.

The original plaintiff had filed a suit for partition and separate possession of house property, resulting in a decree granting 1/5th share to each of the five sons of Ramshankar Prabhashankar Upadhyay. The decree was confirmed by the First Appellate Court, Second Appellate Court, and the Supreme Court.

Girish (Defendant No. 4) sought to amend the decree to increase his share in a specific property (suit property No. 3) from 1/5th to 2/5th based on a sale deed executed by Arvind (Defendant No. 1) and his family. The application was rejected by the Trial Court, leading to a review by the High Court.

The applicants argued that the Trial Court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the amendment application since the decree had already been confirmed by appellate courts. They relied on a Supreme Court ruling, which held that only the appellate court could amend a decree after it had been confirmed on merits.

The Court agreed with the applicants' contention that the Trial Court lacked jurisdiction. However, it found that the amendment sought was not merely a correction of a clerical or arithmetical error but involved substantive changes that were not raised during earlier proceedings.

The Bombay High Court concluded that the amendment requested could not be granted under Section 152 of CPC, as it did not qualify as a mere clerical correction. The application was rejected, and the Court upheld the finality of the original decree.