IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C. W. J.C. No.5707 of 2010 Most.Mohapatia Devi @ Subhadra Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors -------------------------------- 02/ 05.08.2011 Heard Mr. Madanjeet Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Arun Kumar, Assisting counsel to G.P. 5 for the State- respondent herein. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 14.1.2010 passed by the learned Sub Judge Ist, Purnea in Execution Case No. 1 of 2008 as contained in Annexure-5, whereunder the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner under Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) for seeking modification of the decree has been rejected. The facts of the case in brief is that the petitioner is the wife of the plaintiff, an assistant teacher under the State Government. The suit was filed for recovery of arrears, the details of which have been mentioned in the plaint giving rise to Title Suit No. 95 of 1985. The suit was decreed vide judgment and order dated 16.12.1996 in terms of the relief prayed by the petitioner together with interest and cost. Learned counsel for the petitioner, with reference to the finding of the trial court, submits that although the court below considering the delay caused by the State- respondent has directed payment of interest from the date of filing of the suit as the suit was decreed in terms of the relief together with interest and cost hence the interest should have awarded until the date of recovery. It is not in dispute that the entire amount admissible in terms of the judgment and decree has been paid to the petitioner and evidence whereof has been enclosed together with the writ petition. It is at this stage that a petition was filed by the petitioner under Section 152 of the Code seeking modification of the judgment and decree to the extent that the interest so awarded by the trial court should run from the date of filing of the suit until recovery and which has been rejected by the impugned order. I find no infirmity with order impugned as the modification sought is beyond the relief granted by the trial court. The writ petition is dismissed. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)