Sri Monoj Singha Roy vs Sri Ramesh Das
2025 Latest Caselaw 9 Tri

Tripura High Court

Sri Monoj Singha Roy vs Sri Ramesh Das on 2 May, 2025

                                     Page 1 of 3




                           HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                                 AGARTALA
                                CRP No.20 of 2025

Sri Monoj Singha Roy, S/o Lt. Dipak Singha Roy, resident of Near K.B.I.
School, Udaipur Town, P.O. & P.S. R. K. Pur, Gomati Tripura, PIN-
799120.
                                                      ......... Petitioner(s).
                               VERSUS
Sri Ramesh Das, S/o Lt. Birendra Das, resident of Rajarbag, Near Chirar
Mill, Udaipur, P.O. & P.S. R. K. Pur, Gomati Tripura, PIN-799120.
                                                   ......... Respondent(s).

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Suman Bhattcharjee, Advocate.

For Respondent(s) : None.

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. APARESH KUMAR SINGH

Order 02/05/2025

Heard Mr. Suman Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the

petitioner.

2. Petitioner is the decree holder in T.S. No.16/2018, which was

disposed of vide judgment dated 14.02.2019 and decree dated 22.02.2019

(Annexure- 1 & 2 respectively) by the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior

Division), Court No.1, Gomati District, Udaipur, Tripura. The operative

part of the judgment dated 14.02.2019 is as under:

"10. O R D E R

In the result, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed uncontested.

Defendant is directed to execute the Registered Sale Deed in favour of the plaintiff for the suit land described in the Schedule "A" land of the plaint after receiving the balance amount of consideration money of Rs.4,000/- and deliver the vacant possession of the suit land to the plaintiff within one month of the passing of this Judgment, otherwise, if the defendant fails to execute the Registered Sale Deed in favour of the plaintiff after

receiving the balance amount of consideration money and also fails to deliver the vacant possession of the suit land in favour of the plaintiff then the plaintiff can approach the Court to get the Sale Deed executed in his favour by following due process of law.

It is further directed to the defendant not to transfer or alienate the suit property to any other person other than the plaintiff.

Considering the nature of the suit, I make no order of cost and direct the parties to bear their own cost.

In the result, the suit is disposed of uncontested.

Prepare decree accordingly.

Sheristadar of my Court is hereby directed to prepare the decree in the light of my above Judgment and to place it before me for my signature within 15(fifteen) days from the date of passing of this Judgment.

Make necessary entry in the concerned TR. ANNOUNCED."

3. During the execution case preferred by the plaintiff, sale deed

was executed in his favour. The execution case bearing Ex(T) No.02/2022

was disposed of vide order dated 08.04.2024 by the executing Court of

learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Court No.1, Gomati District, Udaipur

taking note that the decree holder has satisfied with the execution of the

sale deed and he is not interested for any kind of further execution of the

decree. Thereafter, the petitioner realized that the vacant possession of the

decretal land had not been delivered in his favour as per the judgment and

decree. Therefore, he preferred Civil Misc. No.30 of 2024 arising out of

Execution(T) No.02/2022 under Section 152 of the Civil Procedure Code,

for amendment of the order dated 08.04.2024 passed by the Civil Judge

(Sr. Division), Court No.1, Gomati District, Udaipur in Ex(T) No.02/2022.

That application has been rejected by the impugned order dated 13.08.2024

by the learned executing Court, holding that the prayer for amendment in

the order dated 08.04.2024 under Section 152 of the CPC cannot be

allowed, since as per Section 152 arithmetical mistakes or clerical mistakes

or errors arising from an accidental slip or omission can only be corrected.

4. This Court, upon hearing the learned counsel for the

petitioner, and after perusal of the records and impugned order, does not

find any error in the approach of the learned executing Court as the prayer

made in Civil Misc. No.30/2024 cannot be allowed under Section 152 of

the CPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, prays that liberty

may be allowed to the petitioner to file a review petition.

The petition is without merit and is accordingly dismissed.

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

However, it is open for the petitioner to seek an appropriate

remedy as per law.

(APARESH KUMAR SINGH), CJ

Munna S MUNNA SAHA

Date: 2025.05.05 15:42:49 +05'30'