IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.2307 of 2007 MD. NURUL HODA & ANR Versus MD. SULEMAN & ORS ----------- 2 16.12.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioners. In the opinion of this court there can be no two views that the decree which has been drawn is absolutely inconsonance with the area described in the plaint including the amendment thereof. That being so, the prayer made by the petitioners for amendment in the judgment and decree, on the ground of there being some clerical or arithmetical error, was itself misconceived. As a matter of fact, in paragraph No. 11 of this Civil Revision application it has been clearly stated that in the light of the report of the Pleader Commissioner, amendment was made in the plaint while describing area in the schedule of the plaint by giving measurement in terms of dhurs or dhurkies. What really the plaintiffs- petitioners therefore, in the name of removal of arithmetical or clerical error wanted was to insert some measurement in terms of the report of the Pleader Commissioner by defining or clarifying into definite area of Karis. In the opinion of the Court below and in fact rightly so, the same did not fall within the scope of removal of clerical error or arithmetical error rather amounted to adding something in the decree which did not exist either in the judgment or decree. It is well settled that an omission in the judgment and decree is not clerical error or arithmetical error. Counsel for the petitioners, however, would contend that - 2 - there is a clear judgment and decree in favour of the petitioners holding that there was an encroachment in the suit land as described in schedule-1 (A) and 2(A) and therefore, if the area as measured by the Pleader Commissioner is not allowed to be rectified/included there would be difficulty in executing the decree. In the opinion of this Court such apprehension is wholly misconceived. The moment, there is a decree for removal of encroachment which has been drawn as per the judgment and also shown in the decree by a schedule and in the schedule there is a measurement available in the Katha, Dhurs or Dhurkis, the same can definitely be executed by the Executing Court even on the basis of the findings recorded in the judgment of the trial Court. That being so, this Civil Revision application is wholly misconceived and is hereby dismissed with the aforementioned observations and directions. Bibhash (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)