Clear appellate relief and decree conformity are required; omission in expressing relief can be corrected under Section 152 CPC.

Appellate judgments allowing a suit must clearly state the relief granted so that the decree conforms to the judgment and remains self-contained and executable. The same discipline applies under Order XLI Rule 31, and if the appellate judgment omits the extent or manner of relief intended, the omission is treated as an accidental slip or omission in recording the court's intention. In that situation, the proper course is rectification under Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure rather than leaving the decree uncertain. The text states that the omission required correction and that the trial court decree could not stand.

---

---

Issues: Whether an appellate judgment allowing a suit must clearly specify the reliefs granted so that a decree can be drawn in conformity with it, and whether the proper course in case of omission is rectification under Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Analysis: The Code requires the plaint to state the relief claimed, the judgment to record the decision and the relief allowed, and the decree to conform to the judgment and specify clearly the relief granted. These obligations apply equally at the appellate stage under Order XLI Rule 31, so that the decree can be self-contained and executable without guesswork. Where the appellate judgment does not clearly express the extent and manner of relief intended to be granted, the omission amounts to an accidental slip or omission in recording the Court's intention. In such a situation, the appropriate course is to seek correction or rectification so that the judgment and decree reflect the true decision.

Conclusion: The omission in the appellate judgment required rectification under Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and the decree drawn by the Trial Court could not stand. The appeal was allowed in favour of the appellant.

---