IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1858 of 2006 STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COLLECTOR, AURANGABAD…….. PETITIONER Versus 1. RAM RANVIJAY PRATAP SINGH 2. KRISHAN VIJAY PD. SINGH 3. ANANT VIJAY PD. SINGH 4. SATYA VIJAY PD. SINGH, ALL SONS OF SHRI RAMESHWAR PD. SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KARMA BHAGWAN, P.S. & DISTRICT ……………………………..… OPPOSITE PARTIES ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar Jha, G. A.II WITH Mr. Uday Bhan Singh, A.C. to G.A.II For the Opp. Parties : M/s Kamla Pd. Roy, Kamleshwar Prasad & Shiv Shankar Pd. Singh, Advocates. 11. 25.03.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite parties. State of Bihar through its official has filed this civil revision application for setting aside the order dated 1.2.2006 passed in Execution Case No.8 of 1994 by which the application of the State of Bihar filed under Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure for making necessary corrections in the calculation of the award amount has been rejected by the court below. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per calculation chart produced in this court and annexed as Annexure-5 to the supplementary affidavit, there was discrepancy in the award amount of more than Rs.28, 000/- - 2 - and, therefore, in the interest of justice it was necessary that the amount of award be corrected in the decree before payment of compensation to the opposite parties. Learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that after reference was decided and an award was prepared by the court below, the petitioner got an opportunity which it did avail by filing a petition under Section 152 of the C.P.C. and got the award amended. In the meantime the State of Bihar preferred an appeal in this Court which appeal, as stated by the learned counsel for the opposite parties, stands dismissed. Thereafter the present petition under Section 152 of the C.P.C. was filed by the petitioner in the court below for re-correction of the award amount pointing some calculation mistakes. The learned court below has found that earlier also the State of Bihar had filed petition under Section 152 of the C.P.C. for correction of the award amount and on its petition, calculation was thoroughly checked and the corrections were made in the award. Therefore, after expiry of ten years it is not open to the petitioner to file another - 3 - petition pointing out mistakes in calculations in the award and making prayer for re- corrections. It is pointed out that the land was acquired in the year 1976 and due to this litigating attitude of the petitioner, the opposite parties have not received award amount till now. It is apparent that whatever correction was required to be made in the award amount by getting calculations corrected, the petitioner has availed it once and on its prayer, the award was corrected. If further mistake continued in the calculation for fixing the award amount, the petitioner is only to blame its officials for not pointing out the same immediately after the corrections were made on the first occasion. It is now not open to the petitioner to rake up the matter of calculation of award amount after ten years and thereby to cause delay in payment of compensation to the opposite parties along with interest and solatium in accordance with law. In the circumstances, this Court finds that the learned court below has taken a correct approach in rejecting the application - 4 - of the petitioner filed under Section 152 of the C.P.C. and hence, this Civil Revision application has no merit and it is dismissed. It goes without saying that the court below shall take up the matter immediately for payment of compensation etc. to the opposite parties as soon as possible in view of the fact that the land was acquired in the year, 1976. B.T. (J.N. Singh, J.)