- (1.) HEARD Mr. Tandon, appearing for the State -petitioners and Mr. Srivastava, for the respondent.
(2.) THIS O.M.P. has been filed for modification/correction of the decree dated 14.12.2006. Mr. Tandon referred to the following portion of the judgment dated 29th, April, 1997, passed in F. A.No. 291 of 1994 R, on the basis of which the impugned decree has been prepared; '' "11......In that contingency the quantum of damage will not exceed; Rs. 2,70,000/ - because Rs, 1,35,000/ - or so was paid as royalty and remaining RS 1,35,000/ - will be the profit and Other expenses. So even in the higher scale the quantum of damages will be not more than Rs. 2,70,000/ - including amount of royalty and sales tax deposited by the plaintiff in favour of defendant no. 7. Considering all these facts, I am of the opinion, that the plaintiff in any view of the matter is only entitled to realize Rs. 2,70,000 / - only by way of compensation and damages from appellants/defendants and award of Rs. 4,50,000/ -by the trial court appears to be excessive. 12. In the circumstances and in view of the discussions made above, this appeal is allowed in part only with proportionate cost throughout and it is hereby ordered that the plaintiff will be entitled to realize Rs. 2,70,000/ - including the amount he deposited by way of damages from the defendant/appellants and further the plaintiff is also entitled to interest @ 6% p.a. on this amount of damages from the date of institution of the suit till realization of the amount. Pleader's fee Rs. 250/ - only. 13. In the result, this appeal is allowed in part in the manner indicated above." He further referred to the following portion of the impugned decree: '' "It is ordered and decreed that this First Appeal is allowed in part only with proportionate cost throughout and it is hereby ordered that the plaintiff Will be entitled to realize Rs. 2,70,000/ - including the amount he deposited by way of damages from the defendant/ appellants and further the plaintiff is also entitled to interest @ 6% p.a. on this amount of damages from the date of institution of the suit till realization of the amount. Pleader's fee Rs. 250/ - only. Accounts noted below 1. Plaintiff/Respondent entitled to get damage Compensation Rs. 2,70,000.00 2. Including the amount he deposited Rs. 1,35,063.04 Total Rs. 4,05,063.04 He submitted that thus the amount of Rs. 1,35,063.04 has been wrongly added, though the same was made part of the damages awarded to the tune of Rs. 2,70,000/ -. Moreover, interest has been added on such wrong calculation i.e. Rs. 4,05,063.04. He also submitted that as per the said judgment, the State paid the awarded amount i.e. Rs. 2,70,000/ - alongwith interest @ 6% p.a., which was received by the respondent on full satisfaction and the execution case i.e. Execution Case No. 4 of 1994 was dropped on 20.8.2006, but thereafter when the decree was prepared by mistake in the manner aforesaid on 14.12.2006, the respondent filed a fresh execution case i.e. Execution Case No. 5 of 2007 for execution of the said decree prepared by mistake.
(3.) MR . Srivastava, on the other hand, tried to justify the said decree and submitted that it has been prepared correctly.;