AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
It was open to the petitioner, relying on the second paragraph of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, to appeal u/s 540 of the CPC against the
decree as amended, notwithstanding the expiration of one month from the data when the decree was passed. This being so, we are of opinion that
a petition u/s 622 of the CPC complaining of the variance of the decree is not admissible. Mr. Justice Mahmood in discussing the question in
Mania Ray v. Raghunandan Singh ILR 7 All. 282 overlooks the possibility of an appeal against the decree as amended, and for that reason comes
to the conclusion that Section 622 of the CPC must be applied. It must be admitted that Mr. Justice Mahmood''s view has been followed in one or
two cases in this Court, but no repotted case is cited in which a Bench of Judges has held that an appeal against the amended decree will not lie.
We dismiss the petition with costs.