JUDGMENT 1. The only question for determination is the meaning of the words "date of amendment" in Article 182 (4) of the First Schedule to the Limitation Act, It is contended for the appellant that the "date of amendment" must mean the date on which the decree is actually altered or corrected and not the date of the Courts order directing the amendment, and the argument is advanced that an amendment does not bear the same relation to the order as a decree bears to the judgment and that, therefore, the provision in the C. P. C. which says that the decree shall bear the date of the judgment is not applicable here. As a matter of fact, an order of amendment is itself a judgment and in accordance therewith, the original decree is altered and becomes a new and amended decree in accordance with the judgment pronounced. It seems, therefore, clear that the date of the amended decree must be the same as that of the judgment. To hold otherwise would be to put in the hands of the ministerial officers of the Court the power to fix any date for the amendment of the decree quite regardless of the date on which the order was passed. The same view was taken in Nirit Lal Jha v. Kalanand Singh 36 Ind. Cas. 533 : 3 P. L. W. 447. and we see no reason to hold otherwise. 2. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with costs.