' JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J.---The petitioners filed a suit against the respondent Abdul Ghaffar seeking specific performance of an agreement to sell. The suit was decreed on 31-3-1980 on the basis of a conceding statement made by Haji Aziz Muhammad, general attorney of the respondent. The land purchased by the petitioners was comprised in Khasra No,2142. The petitioners realized many years after that on account of clerical error the khasra number mentioned in the decree was 4142. They, therefore, filed an application under section 152, C.P.C. For rectification of the decree. Notice was issued to the respondent Abdul Ghaffar. Once again his general attorney appeared and stated that there was no objection if the decree was rectified. This application under section 152, however, has been dismissed by the learned trial Court and a revision petition filed by the petitioners has also been dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Bhakkar, vide order, dated 24-4-2006. The reason given by the learned revisional Court for disallowing the petitioner's application is that it had been filed after 25 years and was, therefore, time-bared.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that a clerical errorin the decree can be rectified at any time and there is no bar of limitation for filing an application for this purpose. In support of this contention, learned counsel for the petitioners have referred to the case titled Manzoor Hussain and 9 others v. Malik Karam Khan and 2 others (1991 SCM R 2451).
3. On the above basis it is submitted that the impugned orders passed by the learned trial Court and the learned Additional District Judge as the revisional Court are not legally sustainable.
4. The L.Rs of respondent Abdul Ghaffar has entered appearancethrough counsel. Muhammad Siddique son of Abdul Ghaffar is also present in person. Both Muhammad Siddique and learned counsel for the respondents confirm the facts asserted by the petitioners and state that they have no objection if the decree passed in favour of the petitioners, dated 31-3-1980 is ordered to be rectified. In the circumstances, his petition is allowed. As a consequence, Khasra No,4142 bearing in the decree shall be corrected to read as Khasra No,2142.
5. This petition is allowed in the above terms.