1. This application in civil revision is presented to us, in our revisional jurisdiction, to review an order of the learned Munsif of Gopalganj, dated 26th April, 1917. It appears to us that the learned Munsif had no jurisdiction to make the amendment which he did in the original decree by the aforesaid order. The original decree was founded on a compromise; and the decree was in the terms of the compromise which was embodied therein; and it is perfectly clear and there is no room for ambiguity or doubt as to its report and effect. On the face of the decree itself it is quite impossible to detect any clerical error or arithmetical mistake which would justify any amendment under Section 152 of the CPC. This is the only section under which we think the learned Munsif could possibly have exercised the jurisdiction which he claimed to amend the decree in question on the petition presented by the judgment-debtor.
2. In some cases of a very transparent character, for the purpose of rectifying an abuse and to effect the ends of justice a decree may possibly be amended under the provisions of Section 151 of the CPC, by a Court in the exercise of its inherent power. In addition, all Courts of justice have an inherent power to amend decrees, so that their decrees may conform with the judgment of the Court itself in such cases, and in such cases only, can the inherent power of the Court be relied upon to amend a decree which is not in conformity with the judgment of the Court. This principal however does not, apply to the present case, inasmuch as the decree is founded upon a compromise if a decree with the compromise embodied therein is inaccurate, or does not embody the true terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties, then the only remedy is by an independent suit to set aside the decree either on the ground of mistake or fraud or some other ground ejusdem generis therewith. The principle governing such cases will be found laid down in the case of Wilding v. Sanderson(1). No doubt, as long as the decree remains in the form of a memorandum on the minute of the Court, it is open to the Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction to make any amendment it thinks fit in the minutes, but once the decree has been passed and signed then the remedy is, except in cases to which Section 152 of the CPC, applies, to institute a suit to set aside that decree on one of the grounds aforesaid.
3. We must set aside the order of the learned Munsif dated 26th April, 1917 and, by consent of the parties, we vary and modify the original decree dated 22nd October, 1914, and declare that in lieu thereof it shall be decreed that the defendants do pay to the plaintiffs as and for damages the sum of Rs. 150 and that in addition the defendants shall pay to the plaintiffs as and for costs of the original suit the sum of Rs. 62 and no more. Let the record be returned to the lower Court and let the lower Court in pursuance of our order by consent draw up a fresh decree in the terms of the declaration hereinbefore made by us by the consent of the parties.
4. The defendants will pay to the petitioner in the present application the sum of one gold mohur as the hearing fee of this application.
V.S/R.K
5. Record returned.